Allowed

Raj Kumar Alias Ram Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2023BAIL/864/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application in a rape case, the Court considered submissions regarding false implication via collusion. Finding no convincing material for tampering, the Court enlarged the applicant on bail subject to strict conditions including attendance and non-interference.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties, subject to conditions regarding attendance and conduct.

Raj Kumar Alias Ram Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 864 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Raj Kumar Alias Ram Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rabindra Bahadur Singh,Balram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Rabindra Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Raj Kumar Alias Ram Kumar , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 610 of 2022, under Section 376 I.P.C. registered at P.S.- Nandgram, DistrictGhaziabad.

¶7

The submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The victim is major aged about 18 years who has love affairs with the applicant and went with her sweet will and consent at Hotel Bajaria. The victim wants to marry with the applicant but due to social status, the father of her was not agreed and collusion with the police lodged the FIR against the applicant. According to the statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. the victim is consenting party with the applicant. The victim stated in her statement about video clip but no evidence of video clip was found by the police and charge sheet filed only under section 376 IPC. The victim herself has denied for her medical examination. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 24,06,2022 having no criminal history.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all 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.

¶10

Let the applicant- Raj Kumar Alias Ram Kumar , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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:-

¶11

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

¶12

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.

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

The bail application is allowed.

¶19

Order Date :- 10.2.2023

¶20

RPD

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raj Kumar Alias Ram Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar Alias Ram Kumar 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

Mohit Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Monish @ Mohnishkant Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Shamim Shekh Vs State of U.P.

Bharti Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra Maurya Vs State of U.P.