Allowed

Dayasagar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Dec 2022BAIL/16136/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, per Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J., granted bail to the applicant (Dayasagar) in a rape case (Cases Crime No. 4 of 2022) involving Sections 376 and 506 IPC. The court identified contradictions regarding the incident date and the victim's medical examination refusal, finding it a fit case for bail to be released on a personal bond and two sureties subject to stan

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to strict conditions of appearance and no abuse of liberty.

Dayasagar Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16136 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dayasagar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhagwan Dutt Pandey,Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 4 of 2022, under Sections 376, 506 IPC, P.S. Bargadwa, District Maharajganj.

¶7

As per prosecution story, on 13.12.2021 applicant came at the residence of the victim and he was permitted to stay there being resident of victim's maika. It is alleged that husband of the victim was out of State on account of his livelihood and taking advantage of his absence, applicant entered the room of the victim at about 12.00 p.m. in the night and committed rape upon her.

¶8

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that there is contradiction with regard to date of the incident as in the FIR incident is allegedly said to have been taken place on 13.12.2021 at 12.00 p.m. in the night whereas the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that the incident took place on 14.12.2021 at about 12.00 p.m. in the night. It is further submitted that the victim has herself refused her medical examination. It is further submitted that perusal of the FIR as well as statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. itself shows that the applicant stayed in the house of the victim for about two days after the incident, which shows that the victim was consenting party. The applicant is in jail since 16.02.2022 and has no criminal history. Charge-sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take time, hence it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶10

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, 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. However, any observation made herein-above, will not affect the trial of the case.

¶11

Let the applicant- Dayasagar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 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

¶13

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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

Order Date :- 8.12.2022/RavindraKSingh

¶21

Digitally signed by RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.12.08 16:27:41 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dayasagar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dayasagar 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

Abdul Quadir Vs State of U.P. and Another

Noor Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jabreel Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pradeep Vs State of U.P.

Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Vipin @ Hori Lal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others