Single judge allowed bail to the applicant charged with rape and cheating. The court found it a fit case for bail without commenting on merits, considering the investigation stage and contradictions, subject to standard conditions.
Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount with specified 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. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42743 of 2018
Applicant :- Nand Kishor @ Nandu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Badri Mani Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ghandikota Sri Devi,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
A perusal of contents of the F.I.R. it reveals that the Smt. Arti, daughter of Ram Naresh filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the concerned Court, with the allegation that the accused-appellant came to the house of the complainant about three months ago and stated that he would get her appointed in a school for which she has to spend something, to which the complainant agreed and being asked by the accusedapplicant the complainant gave him all the documents along with a sum of Rs.2,000/-. Thereafter, the accused-applicant after a month again came to the house of the complainant and stated that her appointment has been confirmed. Accordingly, the complainant on 26.04.2018 in front of one Shyam Ji son of Kripa Shankar and Prem Babu son of Ram Das, resident of village- Dodapur gave accused-applicant a sum of Rs.50,000/-. The accused-applicant again on 08.05.2018 asked the complainant to accompany him Bharathana and to get her joined in the job, to which the complainant accompanied the accused-applicant on his motor-cycle. The accused-applicant took her to his house and offered her cold drink by administering some intoxicated substance in the cold drink. After taking the cold drink, the complainant became unconscious and the accused-applicant forcibly committed rape on her while she was in semi conscious condition. She could not resist the act of the accused-applicant and in the same semiconscious state, she was boarded in the bus. However, the complainant could be able to reach house with great difficulty and narrated the entire incident to the family members. Thereafter, the complainant went to the police station along with her father and narrated the entire incident to the police but the police did not lodge the report nor initiated any proceedings against the accused-applicant. However, basing on the said application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., the present F.I.R. was
registered against the accused-applicant.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that informant was interrogated by the police during the course of the investigation and her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the police. The victim was also sent for medical examination on 07.08.2018 but the medical examination report negates the allegations made by the informant in the F.I.R. and her application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The statement of the victim was also recorded by the Magistrate on 14.08.2018 under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and there were a lot of contradictions between the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and under Section 164 Cr.P.C. In the present case, the investigation has also been completed and charge-sheet has already been submitted by police on 14.09.2018. It is also contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the informant solemnized her marriage with the applicant on 30.09.2017 in front of her relatives and other members of her family but before the said marriage, she did not disclose the fact to the accused-applicant that she has already been married earlier to one Sachin @ Banti and she is having children from that marriage. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecution version against the accused-applicant is false, fabricated and he has been falsely implicated in this case due to ill motive; that the applicant has no criminal history; that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail and the accusedapplicant is languishing in jail since 18.08.2018.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Nand Kishor @ Nandu be released on bail in Case Crime No. 334 of 2018, under Sections 376, 420, 406 and 328 I.P.C., P.S. Bidhuna, District Auraiya on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed
that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
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.
Order Date :- 2.4.2019 V.S.Singh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is a fit case for bail considering the severity of the charge and contradictions in investigation records.
Whether the applicant can be granted bail on furnishing a personal bond and sureties subject to specified conditions.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Nand Kishor @ Nandu
Ghandikota Sri Devi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
