Allowed

Ajay v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2020BAIL/36292/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 36292 of 2020, the High Court allowed bail to the applicant facing prosecution for sexual offences, relying on parity with a co-accused on bail and contradictions in evidence, subject to strict special conditions for immediate release.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail via personal bond without sureties temporarily, with conditions to file an order copy from the High Court website.

Ajay Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36292 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Ajay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Devi Dayal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

The applicant is facing prosecution in Case Crime No.21 of 2020, u/s 366, 343, 504, 376, 511 I.P.C., P.S.-Sainya, DistrictAgra. He is in jail since 17.8.2020.

¶7

Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that the informant is the victim herself, who has lodged the present F.I.R. on 18.2.2020 through an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. for the two incidents dated 31.10.2019 and 13.11.2019. Contention is that the victim has changed her version in the statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C., levelling the allegation only for making attempt to commit rape against the applicant. There is contradiction and the shift in 161 and 164 statements of the victim. Moreover, co-accused Mohar Singh has been admitted on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court while deciding Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.35971 of 2020 vide order dated 02.12.2020. Contention is that since no rape was committed, as such, the principles of parity would apply in the present case. The applicant is in jail since 17.8.2020 having no criminal history.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid factum of parity with the case of coaccused who has been admitted on bail.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, bail order passed in favour of co-accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant Ajay, who is involved in aforementioned Case Crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and

¶11

two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a

¶18

ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶20

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶21

1. The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶22

2. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶23

3. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶24

4. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶25

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

¶26

Order Date :- 3.12.2020 M. Kumar

Ajay v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reeta @ Sunita and Another Vs State of U.P.

Dasrath @ Bhaggulal Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Ashok Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sarvendra Vs State of U.P.