Allahabad High Court
Dil Nawaj And Another vs State Of U.P. on 31 May, 2024
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:100261
Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5524 of 2024
Applicant :- Dil Nawaj And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Bais
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh 'Bais', learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
2. This anticipatory bail application (under Section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.98 of 2020, under Sections 366, 376D and 506 IPC, Police Station Mandi, District Saharanpur.
3. In short, the prosecution story is that on the fateful day when the informant was coming to her house from the market, the co-accused Adil came on motorcycle and forcibly sat the victim on hismotorcycle. It is further alleged that accused persons have smelled some thing to her, thereafter, the accused persons went to the Jungle where the accused persons have committed rape upon her. The accused persons have also given threat to the victim.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case, in fact, no such incident has taken place. The applicants have never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. He further submits that during investigation, no credible evidence was found against the applicants, therefore, the investigating officer has expunged the name of the applicants and submitted charge sheet only again main accused Adil. Being aggrieved, the informant has filed an application under Section 319Cr.P.C., which was rejected vide order dated 03.08.2022, thereafter, after completion of testimony of PWs. 1 to 3, who are Informant, Doctor and Mother of the Informant, the victim again filed an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. on 25.07.2023, which was allowed by the court below and applicants were summoned to face trial vide order dated 09.11.2023. He further submits that the impugned FIR has been lodged as a counterblast to the FIR lodged by the father of the applican against the father of the victim under Sections 376 and 506 IPC. He further submits that the victim was medically examined on 19.03.2020 at District Women Hospital, Saharanpur and as per opinion of the doctor, no sign of external and internal injury was found over the body of the informant. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 has stated that she well known to co-accused Adil and there was also physical relationship with him for the last three years. Prima facie no alleged offence is made out against the applicants.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that after issuing summons by the court below, there is apprehension of imminent arrest of the applicants and in case, the applicants are released on anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the trial.
6. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants but could not dispute the aforesaid contentions raised by learned counsel for the applicants.
7. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, they are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
8. In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicants-Dil Nawaj and Rahman @ Ibadur Rahman, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(ii) The applicants shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(iii) The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicants.
(v) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
(vi) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.
9. In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.
10. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 31.5.2024
Ajeet
