High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:235183 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52138 of 2023 Applicant :- Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Narayan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vijay Bahadur Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard Sri Satya Narayan Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vijay Bahadur, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Pratap Singh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 133 of 2023, under Sections 376-D, 504, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Barhan, District Agra. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 13.07.2023 under Sections 354, 354-Kha, 354-Gha, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 67 of I.T. Act by Mokam Singh against Bharat alleging therein that his sister aged about 20 years whenever she used to go to the fields, the way was from the front of the house of Bharat, he used to pass comments on her. Around 15 days back he threatened her and by making an obscene video threatened her, he also made the said video viral on the Facebook. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The victim was produced before the doctor who refused her medical examination. It is argued that during FIR being lodged the victim was also present at the police station. It is argued that the victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. although for the first time names the applicant who states of him abusing her brother when his brother went to the house for making a complaint to which she states that the applicant and Bharat co-accused abused him and made him run away. It is argued that subsequently in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she for the first time states of the applicant and co- accused Bharat committing rape upon her. It is argued that then the case was converted under Sections 376-D, 504, 506 IPC. It is argued that in so far as the applicant is concerned, he is not prosecuted for offence under the provisions of I.T. Act. It is argued that the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co- accused Bharat. It is further argued that there is nothing recovered from the possession of the applicant. Para 17 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court. He further argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 20 of the affidavit and is in jail since 16.09.2023. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has named the applicant and stated of rape being committing upon her by the applicant and co-accused Bharat. 7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the FIR was lodged against co- accused Bharat in which there is no allegation of rape committed upon her. The applicant is not named in the FIR. In the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. although the applicant is named for the first time but there is no allegation of rape against him. Subsequently, in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she states of rape being committed by the applicant and co-accused Bharat. The applicant is not being prosecuted for offence under the provisions of I.T. Act. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 9. Let the applicant Pratap Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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 I.P.C. (v) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant. 10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. 11. The bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 12.12.2023 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad