Amit Kumar v. State of U.P. and others and vide order dated
Case Details
Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52304 of 2022 Applicant :- Ranjeet Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Om Vikram Singh Chauhan,Ram Om Vikram Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J. Heard Sri Shiv Om Vikram Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ravi Prakash Bhatt, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record. On the basis of instructions received by the learned A.G.A. for the State, notice has already been served upon opposite party No.2. However, no one has appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2 to press this application. The instant application for bail has been moved on behalf of the applicant, Ranjeet with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in F.I.R./ Case Crime No.77 of 2022, under Sections 376-D, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 5-G/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Sahayal, District Auraiya, during pendency of the trial. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted
Legal Reasoning
that the first information report is based on false and fabricated facts. The accused/ applicant is innocent who has been falsely implicated in this case. His further submission is that a false first information report came to be lodged against three named accused persons including the present applicant. He has also submitted that there are general allegations of committing rape upon the victim against all the accused persons including the present applicant. The accused/ applicant is of mature understanding aged about 17 years and whose age, according to medical report, is stated to be 16 years. His next submission is that if the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. read together, it would reveal that the victim, in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has categorically stated that on the fateful day, the applicant caught hold of her hands and, thereafter, rape upon her was committed by other co-accused persons, namely, Ankit @ Amit Kumar and Sudama @ Anuruddha Singh, who have already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.46588 of 2022 titled as Ankit @ Amit Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others and vide order dated 23.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.52292 of 2022 titled as Sudama @ Anuruddha Singh vs. State of U.P. and others respectively. Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that the accused/ applicant is languishing in jail since 01.07.2022 who has no previous criminal history. His further submission is that in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will also fully cooperate with the trial court in getting the trial concluded expeditiously. He has also submitted that the applicant will not intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has
Legal Reasoning
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that three accused persons including the accused/ applicant are named in the first information report who have committed a heinous offence of rape upon the victim. The victim is a child who is aged about 17 years. Even, according to the medical report of the victim, her age is stated to be about 16 years only. According to the first information report, it is revealed that the accused persons including the present applicant have committed rape upon the victim, a child. Therefore, the ingredients of Section 376D I.P.C. stands fulfilled. Therefore, the accused/ applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, he has been unable to dispute the fact that the other co-accused persons, namely, Ankit @ Amit Kumar and Sudama @ Anuruddha Singh, who, according to statement of victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., had committed rape upon the victim on the fateful day, have already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.46588 of 2022 titled as Ankit @ Amit Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others and vide order dated 23.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.52292 of 2022 titled as Sudama @ Anuruddha Singh vs. State of U.P. and others respectively. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record, it transpires that a named first information report came to be against three accused persons including the present applicant. The victim, in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has specifically stated that on the fateful day, the accused/ applicant caught hold of her hands and, thereafter, rape upon her was committed by other co-accused persons, namely, Ankit @ Amit Kumar and Sudama @ Anuruddha Singh, who have already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.46588 of 2022 titled as Ankit @ Amit Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others and vide order dated 23.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.52292 of 2022 titled as Sudama @ Anuruddha Singh vs. State of U.P. and others respectively. The accused/ applicant is languishing in jail since 01.07.2022 who has no previous criminal history. Thus, having regard to overall facts and circumstances of this case and also keeping in view the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, the nature of offence, evidence regarding the complicity of applicant and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, a case for bail is made out. The bail application is, thus, allowed. Let the applicant, Ranjeet be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- 1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial; 2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment; 3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail; 4. The applicant 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 ofÏcer; 5. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, in case the witnesses are present in court; 6. The applicant 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 sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. The learned trial court is also directed to proceed with the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same with utmost expedition keeping in view the provisions contained Section 35(2) POCSO Act, in accordance with law, without granting any unnecessary adjournments to the parties, if there is no other legal impediment. It is made clear that the trial of the aforesaid case shall be conducted without being influenced by any observation made herein above which are confined to the disposal of the instant application for bail. (Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.) Order Date :- 3.2.2023 cks/- Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA KANT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad