Criminal Misc. Bail Application filed by an accused in a rape and kidnapping case who alleged false implication. The court observed the applicant has no criminal record and made out a case for bail by imposing strict conditions.
The applicant was granted bail on personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 54 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11189 of 2018 Applicant :- Raju @ Durga Prasad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Sri M. C. Chandel, learned counsel has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime No/FIR No. 106 of 2017, under Sections 376, 504, 506, IPC, Police Station Marka, District Banda, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Submission made by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has been further submitted that allegation made in the present FIR that applicant has promised the prosecutrix to marry her and establish sexual relationship with the victim for almost two good years and when he did not turn up on his promise then this FIR came in existence. As per high school marksheet the date of birth of the victim is 10.02.1992 and she is quite mature girl. The applicant has relied upon the two judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court Deelip Singh @ Dilip Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, 2005 (1) SCC 88 and Deepak Gulathi Vs. State of Haryana, 2013 (7) SCC 675, in support of his contention. The applicant is in jail since 08.09.2017, having no criminal antecedents to his credit.
Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel
for the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Atar Singh, involved in case crime no. 633 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376, IPC, and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Civil Lines, District Budaun be released on bail 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 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.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.
Order Date :- 12.4.2018 VKG
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to relief on bail given false implication and lack of criminal antecedents.
What conditions should be imposed on the applicant for bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Deelip Singh @ Dilip Kumar Vs. State of BiharReferred¶6
Deelip Singh @ Dilip Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, 2005 (1) SCC 88 · Who else cites this
Deepak Gulathi Vs. State of HaryanaReferred¶6
Deepak Gulathi Vs. State of Haryana, 2013 (7) SCC 675 · Who else cites this
7 provisions across 2 enactments
Raju @ Durga Prasad
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
