Allahabad High Court
Ankit Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 7 February, 2020
Author: Vivek Kumar Singh
Bench: Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54311 of 2019 Applicant :- Ankit Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sharique Ahmed Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Aradhana Singh,Bhawna Verma,Siya Ram Verma Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the complainant is taken on record.
Heard Sri Sharique Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Aradhana Singh, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned AGA for the State and perused the material brought on record.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that allegation of the prosecutrix that applicant assured her for marriage is totally baseless. It is evidently clear that this is a case of consenting party. From the School Certificate prosecutrix is aged about 23 years. There is contradiction in the F.R.I. and the statement recorded under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It is next contended that prosecutrix died at her home in mysterious circumstances and after the incident post mortem was conducted and the Doctor has noted seven ante-mortem injuries upon the body of the deceased, all the injuries caused by hard and blunt object. The injuries of the prosecutrix reflects that she has been mercilessly beaten, may be, by her family members as a honour killing. Learned counsel for the applicant has also relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court passed in the case of (Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v. The State of Maharashtra and others) in (Criminal Appeal No. 1443 of 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 6532 of 2018) decided on 22.11.2018. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant is in jail since 28.7.2019, and undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer, but could not dispute the aforesaid submissions.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicant- Ankit Yadav, be released on bail, arising out of Case Crime No. 215 of 2019, under Sections - 376, 504,506 IPC, Police Station- Panki, District- Kanpur Nagar, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- :-
(i) 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.
(ii) 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) 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.
(iv) 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.
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.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 7.2.2020 ssm