Single judge allowed a bail application for the applicant charged with offences under IPC Sections 354A, 376 (2) (H), 511, 306 and 509, finding the prosecution story incredible and noting parity with a co-accused.
Release on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each.
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. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12473 of 2018
Applicant :- Ran Udaiveer @ Chhotu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Seema,Amit Misra,Kuldeep Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ms. Chaman Aara
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Ran Udaiveer @ Chhotu in connection with Case Crime No. 36 of 2013 (Case No. 289 of 2013) under Sections 354A, 376(2)(H), 511, 306, 509 IPC, P.S. Jaswantnagar, District Etawah.
Heard Sri Veeresh Mishra, Senior Advocate assisted with Sri Kuldeep Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri J.B. Singh, learned AGA along with Sri Mayank Awasthi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant along with other co-accused, numbering a total of five, molested the prosecutrix initially and attempted to ravish her after dragging her into the byelane of a Bazar while she was accompanied by her brother. It is pointed out that the commotion that followed and led the bystanders to intervene on account of which the applicant and the other co-accused, attempting to ravish the prosecutrix, could not succeed. However, in the meanwhile they had done their best and shown her obscene material. It is pointed out that the prosecution case further is, that slighted at the episode, all of a sudden the prosecutrix consumed poison on the way. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the allegations as made out are not only patently incredible but border on absurdity. It is almost impossible to imagine that on a busy place, along with her brother, and, in the presence of the multitude present there, the prosecutrix would be molested and attempted to be ravished, and, above all she would have ready to hand poison to consume while she had gone to the Bazar . It is further submitted that the trial is substantially advanced, and there are no chances of the applicant tampering evidence. Learned counsel for the applicant has invited the attention of the Court to the fact that co-accused Rinku, a brother of the applicant and identically circumstanced, so far as the allegations are concerned, has been admitted to the concession of bail vide order dated 22.10.2013 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 30602 of 2013.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but does not
dispute the factum of parity.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, in particular, the incredible nature of the prosecution story besides the factum of parity but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Ran Udaiveer @ Chhotu involved in Case Crime No. 36 of 2013 (Case No. 289 of 2013) under Sections 354A, 376(2)(H), 511, 306, 509 IPC, P.S. Jaswantnagar, District Etawah be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 13.11.2018
Deepak
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant given the nature of the serious sexual offence and the incredible nature of the prosecution story despite the gravity of the allegations.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ran Udaiveer @ Chhotu
Munir
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
