High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:157397 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31547 of 2023 Applicant :- Dhyan Chandra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Legal Reasoning
8. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of of record, evidence, complicity of applicant, nature and gravity of offence coupled with the fact that prima facie, the allegations made in the F.I.R. are false and concocted inasmuch as the present criminal proceedings appear to have engineered by the prosecutrix in reaction to the criminal proceedings already initiated by the applicant, the details of which have been mentioned in paragraphs 11,12 and 13 of the affidavit filed in support of the present application for bail, the medical evidence does not support the ocular version of the occurrence, the clean antecedents of the applicant, the period of incarceration undergone and inspite of the fact that the charge sheet has been submitted therefore, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant, the learned A.G.A. could not point out any such circumstance from the record necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant, the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sumit Subhaschandra Gangwal & Anr. Vs. The State of Maharastra & Anr. 2023 Live Law (SC) 373 (paragraph 5), but without making any comment on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed. 10. Let the applicant-Dhyan Chandra, be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC. (iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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 IN INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, 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 THE HIM/HER 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. 11. 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 :- 2.8.2023 Imtiyaz Digitally signed by :- Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Arguments
1. Heard Mr. Sudarshan Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. 2. Perused the record. 3. This application for bail has been filed by applicant-Dhyan Chandra seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 146 of 2023, under Section 376, 377, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Bhamora, District- Bareilly during the pendency of trial. 4. Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 21.04.2023, a delayed F.I.R. dated 23.04.2023 was lodged by first informant Smt. Nasreen and was registered as Case Crime No. 146 of 2023, under Section 376, 377, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Bhamora, District- Bareilly. In the aforesaid F.I.R. applicant Dhyan Chandra has been nominated as solitary named accused. 5. The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is to the effect that modesty of the prosecutrix was deliberately and forcibly dislodged by the applicant on 21.04.2023 at around 7:00 p.m. 6. Learned counsel for applicant contends that though applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused inasmuch as the charge sheet has been submitted on 13.06.2023, yet he is liable to be enlarged on bail. Attention of the Court was then invited to the averments made in paragraphs 11,12, and 13 of the affidavit filed in support of the present application for bail. On basis thereof, he submits that the present criminal proceedings have been engineered as a counter-blast to the criminal proceedings, previously initiated by the applicant himself against family members of the prosecutrix as well as the prosecutrix herself. It is thus contended that allegations made in the F.I.R. are false and concocted. Applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in aforementioned case crime number. The medical evidence of the prosecutrix does not support the ocular version of the occurrence. In the light of facts as noted above, the statements of the prosecutrix under Section 161/164 Cr.P.C. are not worthy of reliance. Even otherwise, applicant is a man of clean antecedents having no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 08.06.2023. The police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. As such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallized. Upto this stage, no such circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial. It is thus urged that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial. 7. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that since applicant is a named and charge sheeted accused, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage.