Allahabad High Court
Pahadi vs State Of U.P. on 17 August, 2021
Author: Alok Mathur
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 15 Case :- BAIL No. - 2229 of 2021 Applicant :- Pahadi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishan Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Krishna Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P.
2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in pursuance to the First Information Report registered as Case Crime No. 215 of 2020, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Maholi, District - Sitapur.
3. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that present first information report has been lodged by the daughter-in-law of the prosecutrix, alleging that on 10.06.2020, when the prosecutrix was not well then the applicant came to ask her about her health and he sat down close to the prosecutrix and sexually assaulted her. During investigation the concerned Investigating Officer has tried to obtain statement of prosecutrix under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she refused stating that she will give her statement in the Court.
4. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecutrix in the meanwhile has died and this fact has also been verified by learned Additional Government Advocate and according to him the prosecutrix died on 10.09.2020. Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his submissions has argued that the story set up in the first information report itself is improbable inasmuch as, the prosecutrix was aged about 80 years and even in the medical examination report, the allegations levelled in the first information report could be verified. Even before the statements of prosecutrix under Sections 161/164 Cr.P.C. could be recorded, she died, coupled with the fact that the contents of first information report itself seem to be improbable. Lastly it is submitted that the applicant is in jail since 12.06.2020.
5. Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind the fact that the prosecutrix was aged about 80 years and also that before her statements under Sections 161/164 Cr.P.C. could be recorded, she died, consequently, in absence of any material which may come up during investigation, there is no likelihood of any further material coming up during investigation coupled with the fact that the applicant has spent nearly one year in judicial custody, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
7. Let applicant Pahadi be released on bail in Case Crime No. 215 of 2020, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Maholi, District - Sitapur, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/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.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and proceed against the applicant in accordance with law.
9. This order shall not influence the trial Court for proceeding with the trial.
10. The application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.8.2021 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.)