Held that the applicant involved in Case Crime No.155 of 2016 be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to four specific conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.
Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties of the like amount, subject to four conditions.
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. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16804 of 2016 Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar,Avanish Kumar Shukla,Deepak Kumar Pandey,Mithilesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Akhil Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Prem Shankar Prasad, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Sunil Kumar with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.155 of 2016, under Sections 366, 376, 509, 506 I.P.C. and Section 66 of I.T. Act, Police Station Kotwali Farrukhabad, District Farrukhabad.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next argued that as per allegation in the FIR, the prosecutrix, who is 22 years old, became friendly with the applicant through facebook. After passage of time, the applicant requested the prosecutrix to marry. Under the pretext of marrying, the applicant called the prosecutrix on 27.01.2016 at Farrukhabad Railway Station and took her to Anand Hotel, near Railway Station, in Room No.305 and sexually assaulted her. The applicant also captured objectionable photographs of the prosecutrix. On 28.01.2016 the applicant sent the objectionable photographs through whatsapp to the prosecutrix. Thereafter, the applicant along his friend, i.e. co-accused Divyanshu Kumar used to blackmail the prosecutrix and the applicant also refused to marry. It has been argued that the applicant was friendly with the prosecutrix and has not committed any such offence. It is further stated that the applicant continued the friendly relations with the prosecutrix and on some issue there was a dispute between the two, due to which she has got the present FIR lodged by falsely implicating the applicant. There is nothing on record to show that any such incident has taken place. Learned counsel has pressed the bail application on the ground of detention as the applicant is in jail since 12.02.2016 and the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. It is next contended that the applicant has no criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release of the accused in Excise Act, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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 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.
Order Date :- 31.10.2019 Anand Sri./-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in the present criminal proceeding.
Whether the applicant can be denied bail based on the nature of the offence and risk of misuse.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶8
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Sunil Kumar
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Manju Rani Chauhan
Parties & counsel
