Allowed

Dharmdas v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2022BAIL/30951/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad disposed of a bail application filed by Dharmdas. The court, while considering the nature of the offence and submissions, granted bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and local sureties, along with specific conditions regarding attendance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned court.

Dharmdas Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 58

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30951 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dharmdas Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra,Rafeek Ahmad Khan

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶6

As per office report dated 26.09.2022, notices have been issued to the opposite party nos. 2 and 3, but the report regarding service of notice has not been received by the office till date.

¶7

Learned AGA states that notice was sent by the State to the opposite party no. 2 and the same has been served upon him, but no one is present on his behalf.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶9

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Dharmdas with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 120 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 109 I.P.C. and Section 8/18 POCSO Act, Police Station - Ajnar, District - Mahoba, during the pendency of the trial.

¶10

Prosecution case in brief is that the incident alleged to have taken place on 22.06.2022 at 11.00 p.m. for which the FIR was lodged by the complainant Dipak Ahirwar brother of the victim, aged about 16 years, against the co-accused Lakka Ahirwar alleging therein that Lakka Ahirwar, who is living in the house of the applicant has enticed away his sister.

¶11

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The name of the applicant has surfaced during the course of investigation. In the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the victim levelled the allegation of rape against the co-accuse Lakka Ahirwar. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. there is no allegation against the applicant. It is further submitted that according to version of the victim one Deshraj is the eyewitness of the incident, therefore the statement of Deshraj was also recorded by the Investigating Officer and in

¶12

his statement he is clearly stated that only the co-accused was present at the time of the alleged incident. It is further submitted that the case of the applicant is distinguished from the coaccused Lakka Ahirwar. It is also submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. It is next contended that 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. The applicant is in jail since 01.07.2022.

¶13

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release of the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment as well as the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶16

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(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. 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, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(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 in accordance with law.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 3.11.2022 SK Srivastava

¶21

Digitally signed by SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.11.09 11:23:30 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dharmdas v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmdas v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Mohshin Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Afjal Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arshad Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Lodhi Vs State of U.P.