Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail application allowed; applicant Arun Kumar to be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned, subject to conditions (i)-(vi): no tampering with evidence; no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses; no inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure; filing an undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present (default treatable as abuse of liberty of bail); remaining present before the trial court on each date fixed, failing which proceedings may lie under Section 229-A IPC; and, on misuse of bail and failure to appear after proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., initiation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Arun Kumar should be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, in light of the victim being major and consenting and her statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. not supporting the prosecution case.

Court's answer

On due consideration of the submissions, the record, the victim's statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., the medico legal examination showing the victim to be major, the applicant's incarceration since 18.10.2022 and his absence of previous criminal history, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the court found it a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail allowed (High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, single judge). The victim was recorded as major per medico legal examination and was submitted to be a consenting party who left home on 28.4.2022, resided with the applicant in Delhi and married him; her statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. did not support the prosecution case and medical did not corroborate it. The applicant was in jail since 18.10.2022 with no criminal history. Bail was granted without expressing any opinion on merits, subject to conditions including non-tampering, non-intimidation of witnesses, an undertaking against adjournments, attendance before the trial court, and exposure to proceedings under Section 229-A IPC and, upon proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., Section 174-A IPC.

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34 of 2024

Applicant :- Arun Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. Of Home And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Imaran Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jai Prakash Shukla

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

1. Short Counter AfÏdavit filed by respondent no.2 is taken on record.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim is major and consenting party. She on her own accord went away on 28.4.2022 to Jais from her house at 1 O'clock in night. Thereafter from Jais she went to Delhi through train. She resides there with the applicant for ten days' and married him. The victim in her statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C. has not supported the prosecution case. Medical does not corroborate the prosecution story. The applicant has no criminal history.

3. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

4. On due consideration to the submissions advanced; perusal of the record; as also the statements of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C.; as per the medico legal examination the victim is major; the applicant is

languishing in jail since 18.10.2022; the applicant has no previous criminal history and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

5. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Arun Kumar be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

(iv) 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.

(v) 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(vi) 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.

Order Date :- 5.1.2024

Madhu

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench