Allowed

Laxman Rajbhar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Jul 2023BAIL/27743/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the court observed contradictions in the victim's statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. regarding consent. Noting the victim is a major, the applicant has no criminal history, and no evidence suggested tampering, the court exercised judicial discretion to allow the bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding attendance, non-tampering, and not seeking adjournments.

Laxman Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:130152

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27743 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Laxman Rajbhar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Yadav,Yashpal Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Yashpal Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Laxman Rajbhar, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 89 of 2023, under Sections 366, 376, 494 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Mehnajpur, District Azamgarh.

¶9

The First Information Report of the present case was lodged on 29.04.2023 under Section 366 IPC by Smt. Pushpa Devi against the applicant alleging therein that on 25.04.2023 at about 01:00 am her daughter aged about 21 years has been enticed away by the applicant. She was searched a lot but could not be traced.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that as per the First Information Report, the victim is aged about 21 years and is a major. It is argued that even as per her High School Marksheet, she is aged about 21 years. It is argued that in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. victim has stated of going with the applicant out of her own sweet will and they travelled from the Azamgarh to Mumbai without any objection wherein she stated to have solemnized marriage with him. They were living husband and wife. She further stated that there were physical relationship between them with consent. It is argued that subsequently in her statement recorded under Station 164 Cr.P.C. she although states of going with the applicant to Mumbai, solemnizing marriage but states of physical relationship without her consent. It is argued that the same is under pressure of family members and is a

¶11

contradiction as that of statement given under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It is further argued that during investigation Sections 376, 494 IPC has been added. It is argued that the victim was produced before the doctor wherein she refused her medical examination. It is argued that the present case is a case of consent. He further argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 13 of the affidavit and is in jail since 18.05.2023.

¶12

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has stated that physical relationship was established without her consent and as such under Section 376 IPC is made out. It is argued that as such the bail application of the applicant be rejected.

¶13

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the victim is a major. The applicant and the victim were travelling to different places for which the victim did not make any objection. The victim states of going with the applicant with her consent in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. he states of going with the applicant out of her own sweet will and solemnizing marriage but states that physical relationship was established without her consent. The same is in contrast in her statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Let the applicant Laxman Rajbhar , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence

¶19

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.

¶20

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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 I.P.C.

¶21

(v) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶22

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶23

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶24

The bail application is allowed.

¶25

Order Date :- 3.7.2023 M. ARIF

¶26

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶27

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Laxman Rajbhar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxman Rajbhar 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

Jagdish Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Vs State of U.P.

Smt Munni Devi Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeev Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Hari Babu Vs State of U.P.