The High Court granted bail to the applicants inputting personal bond and two sureties under Section 376 IPC without expressing opinion on the merits of the false implicate claim.
Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties under conditions against tampering, intimidation, and non-appearance.
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. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46075 of 2019
Applicant :- Krishna Murari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mahesh Prasad Yadav,Shiv Badan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Sri Rajaram Kushwaha, learned counsel, has filed vakalatnama on behalf of complainant, let it be taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. In the first information report, the victim has shown her age about 28 years. The victim is a major lady aged about 28 years. In the first information report it has been mentioned that the applicant had been making physical relation for the last six years on the pretext of marriage. It has been further mentioned that finally on 5.6.2019 the applicant refused to marry with the victim, thereafter, she lodged the first information report. The contents of the F.I.R. shows that there was friendship in between the applicant and the victim and the victim was a consenting party. For a period of six years, prior to lodging this F.I.R., the victim neither made any complaint to anyone nor she lodged any F.I.R. It has been further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. No offence is made out against the applicant. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 21.8.2019.
Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant established physical relation with the victim on the pretext of marriage. When the applicant refused to marry with the victim, the victim lodged the first information report against the applicant. The applicant has committed the alleged offence, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.
Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Krishna Murari involved in Case Crime No.108 of 2019, under Section 376, 506 IPC Police Station Majhgavan District Hamirpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions;
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 6.11.2019
Gss
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in the criminal case.
Krishna Murari
State of U.P.
Bachchoo Lal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
