Allahabad High Court
Basant Alias Basantlal Alias Basantram ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home ... on 28 August, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:57307 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7652 of 2023 Applicant :- Basant Alias Basantlal Alias Basantram Maurya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lucknow And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
1. Notice to the opposite party no.2 has been served by the State and a communication given to the opposite party no.2 signed by him is placed as C.A.-1 to the counter affidavit filed by the State and as per the report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur sent to this Court also, the opposite party no.2 is shown to have been served. However, no one is present on his behalf.
2. Heard Shri Ravindra Shukla, learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Basant Alias Basantlal Alias Basantram Maurya, for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 0003 of 2023, under Sections 363, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of P.O.C.S.O. Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)(5) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Baldirai, District Sultanpur, during trial.
4. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. Applicant is aged about 65 years and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.
5. It is further submitted that the first information report of the case has been lodged by the father of the prosecutrix on 03.01.2023 stating therein that on 02.01.2023 at about 4:00 pm. his daughter has been enticed away by some unknown person and she while leaving the home has also taken with her Rs. 50,000/- cash and she is also carrying a mobile phone, which has been given by that unknown person. The statements of the prosecutrix under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has been recorded, wherein she stated to have been sexually assaulted a year before the lodging of the F.I.R. and thereafter for 3-4 times she was again assaulted at some orchard. She has also stated that the applicant was blackmailing her and was also intimidating her to reveal her relationship with him and it is on this score she had taken Rs. 50,000/- from his house and had gone to 'Isauli' where she (prosecutrix) met with the daughter-in-law of the applicant and they promised to take her to Ahmedabad. However, after boarding the train for Ahmedabad they left her alone and on reaching Ahmedabad she was alone and had stayed in the house of one 'tea vendor' and, thereafter, on a call received on her phone by her family members she returned back.
6. Highlighting the above facts, it is vehemently submitted that the story, as cooked up by the prosecutrix is not only false, but highly improbable and could not be believed. Elaborating further, it is submitted that it is hard to believe that the applicant would involve his daughter-in-law (Bahu) for committing the offence and it appears that the prosecutrix had eloped with some other person and on the basis of prior enmity the name of the applicant has been dragged into this case.
7. It is further submitted that the statement of the prosecutrix is not found corroboration by the medical report, as no injury, etc. has been found on her person at the time of examination. She was aged about 17 years at the date and time of the incident and was having sufficient intellect.
8. It is next submitted that applicant is languishing in jail in this case since 05.03.2023 and he is not having any criminal history. He is a respectable citizen of the locality and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.
9. Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has committed an heinous offence and, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.
10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that applicant was not named in the F.I.R. The age of the prosecutrix is about 17 years, while the age of the applicant is of 65 years at the time of the incident. The medical examination report of the prosecutrix is clean, as no injury, etc. or any other abnormality has been found therein. The prosecutrix has stated to have been sexually assaulted by the applicant a year before the lodging of the F.I.R. and thereafter 3-4 occasions and also that it was on his behest he had left her home and in this regard the daughter-in-law of the applicant has also helped in committing the crime, while the defence of the applicant is that the story, as cooked up by the prosecutrix is highly improbable and could not be believed, as no sane person would involve his daughter-in-law in the crime of this nature. It appears to be an admitted case of the prosecution that throughout the journey the prosecutrix was having a mobile phone with her and she could only contact her family members, as per her statement, when she reached Ahmedabad and was also staying with a 'tea vendor'. Applicant is languishing in jail in this case since 05.03.2023 without any criminal antecedents and the presence of the applicant may be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.
11. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed.
12. Let the accused/applicant- Basant Alias Basantlal Alias Basantram Maurya involved in above-mentioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
14. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
15. Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.
Order Date :- 28.8.2023 Praveen