Deepak Rajput @ Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:190094

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3478 of 2023

Applicant :- Deepak Rajput @ Anil Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijendra Kumar Raj

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Additional cause list revised.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Deepak Rajput @ Anil Kumar , with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 566 of 2022, under Sections 376(3), 354, 504 and 506 IPC and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, and Section 3(2)(V), 3(1) (dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Manjhanpur, District- Kaushambi, during pendency of trial.

¶9

The applicant was enlarged on interim bail by this Court vide order dated 22.02.2023 for a period of six months on the submission of the learned counsel for applicant that there was possibility of compromise between the parties.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the compromise could not take place between the parties. Therefore, the applicant has surrendered on 22.08.2023. The statement of P.W.-1, the first informant and also mother of the victim, has been brought on record which shows that she has not supported the allegations made against the applicant in FIR. She has admitted that the victim used to talk with the applicant on mobile phone and being disturbed by the same she lodged the FIR against the applicant alleging commission of offence of rape. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future.

¶11

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any

¶12

indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

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

¶19

Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 3.10.2023 Abhishek

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak Rajput @ Anil Kumar v. State of U.P.and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Rajput @ Anil Kumar v. State of U.P.and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Maina Mandal Vs State of U.P.

Ankit Tiwari Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Deepti Rani Vs State of U.P.

Umesh Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Goswami Vs State of U.P.

Virendra Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.