Allowed

Rohtash v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Jun 2021BAIL/12785/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge High Court granted bail to Rohtash, the applicant, who was one of multiple accused persons in a case involving abduction of a minor. The court considered statements under CrPC Sections 161 and 164 where the victim's account varied. Bail was allowed with personal bond and sureties subject to standard conditions regarding trial attendance and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Rohtash on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions of trial attendance and non-intimidation of witnesses.

Rohtash Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12785 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Rohtash Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge her on bail in Case Crime No.0267 of 2020, under Section 366 I.P.C., P.S. Hathras Junction, District Hathras.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to F.I.R. version on 24.09.2020 at about 9:00 p.m. in the night victim aged about 19 years went to answer call of nature from where Ankur and Aman enticed away her. He further submits that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. In statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C, the victim has stated that she eloped with Ankur and solemnized marriage in a temple on 25.09.2020, thereafter, they lived together as husband and wife. In statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has stated that she was forcefully taken by Ankur, thereafter, she was not in conscious condition and when she gained consciousness then found that there were Ankur, Aman, Pawan and the applicant, she does not know whether any bad act has been committed upon her or not but she had body ache and Ankur solemnized marriage forcefully with her in a temple in Gurgaon. There is no possibility of the applicant 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. It is next contended that there is no criminal history of the applicant and is languishing in jail since 07.01.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submits that the applicant has committed the alleged offence, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, age of the victim at the time of incident and statement under Sections 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C., without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Rohtash involved in aforesaid case crime be released

¶10

on bail on his/her 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 applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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 applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/her counsel. In case of his/her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/her 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/her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(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/her 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 :- 9.6.2021 Jitendra

Rohtash v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohtash 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ankit Vs State of U.P.

Arshad Vs State of U.P.

Avnish Vs State of U.P.

Autari Vs State of U.P.

Salal Husain and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Vinnu @ Vinod Vs State of U.P.