Allowed

Raukesh@ Rauke v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2022BAIL/7408/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the applicant, an accused of rape. The court accepted that the victim knew the applicant but held that the bail prayer was made out based on the larger mandate of Article 21, while carefully noting it did not express an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to non-tampering with evidence and presence in Court on fixed dates.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7408 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Raukesh@ Rauke Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashvni Mishra,Anand Kumar Mishra,Shiv Kant Mishra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

There is allegation against the applicant of committing offence of rape against the victim.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C, which shows that the victim knew the applicant well. She used to talk to him on phone; had gone with him for dining; there are intimate photographs allegedly taken by the applicant.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication. First information report was lodged after the mother of the victim reached the scene of occurrence and she saw the victim with the applicant in compromising position. Applicant is in jail since 04.12.2021 and has no criminal history.

¶10

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted herein above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant, Raukesh@ Rauke , involved in Case Crime No.81 of 2021, under Sections 323, 376 I.P.C, Police Station Godha, DistrictAligarh 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.

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

(ii) 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

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date

¶16

fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. 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

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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

(v) 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

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶20

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶21

Order Date :- 9.9.2022 SS

¶22

Digitally signed by SURENDAR SINGH NARANG Date: 2022.09.09 16:13:09 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raukesh@ Rauke v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raukesh@ Rauke 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

Girish Vs State of U.P.

Suresh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Suman Vs State of U.P.

Arif Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Parvindar Vs State of U.P.

Vishnu Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others