High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19008 of 2022 Applicant :- Vinit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Madhu Ranjan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Shri Madhu Ranjan Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and also perused the record. By means of the present bail application the applicant, who is facing prosecution in connection with Case Crime No.53 of 2022, u/s 452, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S.- Baniyather, District-Sambhal, is seeking his enlargement on bail during trial. The applicant is in jail since 28.02.2022. Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that the father of the victim has lodged the present F.I.R. on 07.2.2022 for the alleged incident took place on 2.2.2022 against the applicant that when the applicant went to seek contribution from the parent of the victim, then it was revealed by the victim that her parent had gone to the field. Taking advantage of this situation, the applicant after stuffing mouth of the victim and exerting threat on country made pistol, committed rape upon her. I have perused the statements of the victim u/s 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and also her medical report, which indicate visible changes in the stand taken by the victim. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that it was only because her Tau came on spot and saw both of them in a compromise situation, then the victim has changed her stand and fastened the allegation against the applicant of committing rape upon her. From the medical report of the victim too, it is evidently clear that there is no injury over her external or internal part of her body, suggestive of the fact that no force was ever exerted on her while the applicant was quenching his animal instinct. Facts and circumstances of the case suggests that the victim was a consenting party all this while, as such, the applicant deserves to be bailed out. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above facts. Taking into account the entire gamut of circumstances, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Vinit, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN 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. (ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC. (iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC. (iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANT IS DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. (v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-: 1. The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored. 2. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. 3. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned. 4. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above. Order Date :- 11.5.2022 M. Kumar Digitally signed by MANISH KUMAR Date: 2022.05.13 17:05:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad