Allowed

Vikas Kumar Rahi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Dec 2022BAIL/58632/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed a bail application filed by Vikas Kumar Rahi accused under the Immoral Trafficking Act. The court considered the case nature and released the applicant on personal bond and sureties with conditions to prevent trial tampering and participation proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding appearance and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 59

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 58632 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vikas Kumar Rahi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Satyendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Shravan 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- Vikas Kumar Rahi with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 311 of 2022, under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Act, 1956, Police Station-Lalpur Pandeypur, DistrictVaranasi during the pendency of trial.

¶7

As per the prosecution story on 22.10.2022 believing upon the information of the informer, police personnel raided the spot i.e. Durga Complex 3rd Floor, Pandeypur, Varanasi and arrested four female, one male members and recovered some Condom etc. from the spot.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the present first information report lodged by the police is nothing but a bundle of lie and due to enmity 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. It is further submitted that the applicant is innocent. Applicant is neither the shop owner nor he was arrested on the spot. The applicant is only a sweeper. There is no independent eye witness to the said incident. There is no direct evidence against the applicant so as to implicate the applicant in the instant case.

¶9

Apart from the above, it is submitted that the co-accused, namely, Subham Pandey, who is the owner of the shop, and has also been named in the first information report have already been enlarged on bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15th December, 2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 56389 of 2022. The case of the present applicant is on better footing to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail.

¶10

The applicant has no 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 since 23rd October, 2022.

¶11

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the

¶12

applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

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:-

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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.

¶19

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 21.12.2022

¶21

Sushil/-

¶22

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.12.22 09:24:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vikas Kumar Rahi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Kumar Rahi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dileep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Rajpoot Vs State of U.P.

Ajay @ Alla Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rehman Vs State of U.P.

Chhabila Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Chhotelal Vs State of U.P.