Pintu and Another Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 36

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9786 of 2020

Applicant :- Pintu And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Priya Ranjan Rai,Birendra Kumar Arya,Swati Agrawal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to enlarge them on bail in Case Crime No.119 of 2019, under Sections 376-D, 342 I.P.C., Police Station Phoolpur, District Azamgarh.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that prosecutrix herself registered the first information report against the applicants on 06.05.2019. According to F.I.R. version on 05.05.2019 at about 7:00 p.m. when the prosecutrix was returning home from the flour mill of Subham Rai, applicants Pintu and Sonu by pressing her mouth took away her forcibly in the house of Angad, Angad closed the door of the house and both committed rape upon her, thereafter, she became unconscious, on gaining consciousness she started weeping then applicants took away her Durwasa by motorcycle taking to village Biradar. Thereafter, left her in village Mauna at about 11:30 p.m. In statement under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has stated that applicants committed rape upon her when she became unconscious they took away her to a doctor thereafter left her at 11:30 p.m. at primary school of her village. Learned counsel further submits that as per high school certificate date of birth of the victim is 02.06.1999, according to which at the time of incident she was major. It is further submitted that the victim remained about four five hours out of the house but no one of her family member searched her. Further submits that as per paper attached with supplementary affidavit, victim had love affair with Pintu and on 31.05.2019 after twenty five days of the incident, marriage of the victim was solemnized with other person. It is also submitted that as per site plan at the time of incident applicants and victim were inside of room and sister of co-accused Angad was preparing food which also creates doubt regarding the incident. It is also submitted that it appears very unnatural that accused who

¶8

commit rape will take the victim to a doctor and after treatment brought back and leave at her village. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. They have been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no possibility of the applicants of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicants are enlarged on bail, the applicants shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no criminal history of the applicants and are languishing in jail since 07.05.2019.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicants and submits that victim herself has lodged the F.I.R. and supports the case through her statement under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., therefore, the applicants are not entitled for bail.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, as per high school certificate age of the victim and after incident taking the victim to a doctor thereafter, bringing back to her village, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicants are entitled for bail, let the applicants- Pintu and Sonu involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on their 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 :-

¶11

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicants 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.

¶12

(ii) The applicants 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.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure theirs presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law.

¶15

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

¶16

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. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 1.12.2020 Jitendra

Pintu and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pintu and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kismat Ali Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Vs State of U.P.and Another

Hariom Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Atul Patel Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhupendra @ Lauhari Vs State of U.P.

Shubham @ Abhishek Chaudhray Vs State of U.P.