Allowed

Daulat v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2022BAIL/50723/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Daulat in a crime under Sections 363 and 366 IPC. The court granted release on a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions ensuring court attendance and preventing delays during the trial.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with a personal bond and two local sureties subject to undertaking regarding court attendance and no adjournment seeking.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50723 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Daulat Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Mani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Krishna Mani, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Sharavan Kumar Ojha learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Daulat with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 0111 of 2022, under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C., Police Station-Myorpur, DistrictSonbhadra, during the pendency of trial.

¶7

The present first information report has been lodged by the mother of the victim on 11th October, 2022 at 21.35 hrs. alleging therein that on 11th October, 2022 at 06.00, her daughter (victim), who was missing, has been probably enticed away by the applicant as he earlier tried to entice away her.

¶8

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present first information report lodged by the informant i.e. mother of the victim is nothing but a bundle of lie and the same has been lodged only for exploiting the applicant by indulging his name in a fake, false and frivolous case. The entire prosecution story as unfolded in the first information report is absolutely a self-made story projected by the informant. The real fact is that the victim was in love with the applicant and the victim went with the applicant on her own free will. The parties are consenting. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as given before the Doctor who has medically examined her, the victim has stated that on the promise to marry her, she went along with the applicant on her own free will. She has also stated that the applicant has not committed any wrong upon her. In the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has stated that she knew the applicant for the last one year and on his asking she went along with him on her free will. There is no evidence that she ever protested or resisted the act of the applicant or made any complaint all this while. As per the report of the Chief Medical Officer, Sonebhadra dated 20th October, 2022 the age of the victim is between 18 to 19 years. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. 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

¶9

since 12th October, 2022.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but they could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, 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:-

¶12

(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.

¶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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶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. 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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

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.

¶17

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)

¶18

Order Date :- 18.11.2022

¶19

Sushil/-

¶20

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.19 09:59:40 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Daulat v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daulat 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Afzaal @ Monu Rathaur Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kami Vs State of U.P.

Sintu Vs State of U.P.

Aleem Vs State of U.P.

Jeeshan @ Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Chandani Vs State of U.P.