Allahabad High Court
Jeet Lal Saroj vs State Of U.P. on 1 November, 2019
Author: Rajeev Singh
Bench: Rajeev Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 11 Case :- BAIL No. - 10305 of 2019 Applicant :- Jeet Lal Saroj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mata Prasad Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.51 of 2019, under Sections 376, 352, 504 & 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kohandaur, District Pratapgarh, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case, he is having no previous criminal history and in jail since 02.04.2019. It is further submitted on behalf of applicant that the prosecutrix alongwith her family members was forcing the applicant to enter into marriage with her but the parents of the applicant were not agreed, as a result, parents of the prosecutrix called the police in the night of 21.03.2019 by making call to police control room and thereafter police party reached on the spot, but neither the prosecutrix nor her parents made any written complaint to the police and thereafter the police party went away.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that on the written complaint of the prosecutrix , the F.I.R. No. 51 of 2019 (supra) was registered against the applicant and his parents on 27.03.2019 and he also drew attention of this Court on the statements of constable Badri Narayan Singh and constable driver Umesh Yadav in which they categorically stated that on 21.03.2019 they went to the place of incident on the call of the prosecutrix and her family members and when they reached on the spot and found that the prosecutrix was saying to the applicant that either solemnize marriage with her otherwise he will be behind bars in a false rape case and when the written complaint was asked from the prosecutrix and her family members, then they refused, as a result, Jeet Lal Saroj was brought to police station, but thereafter he was allowed to go on the request of the parents of the applicant and others.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that villagers also stated in their statements that the prosecutrix and the applicant were in relation since long back, but due to some dispute, the impugned accusation was initiated against the applicant. He further submitted that the radiological age of the prosecutrix is found to be 25 years.
Learned counsel for the applicant also drew attention of this Court on the findings recorded by the Investigating Officer on 28.03.2019 (appended as annexure No.2 to the application), in which he observed that on 21.03.2019 some dispute was arisen between the applicant side and the prosecutrix side, as a result, call was made to police control room and police party reached on the spot, but no written complaint was given by the prosecutrix side and it is also observed by the Investigating Officer that when the applicant side refused to solemnize the marriage of the applicant with the prosecutrix then the impugned accusation was initiated against the applicant and further no incriminating evidence in relation to offence under Section 376 I.P.C. is found. Therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and she supported the version made in the F.I.R. but he conceded the fact that the Investigating Officer made observation (appended as annexure No.2 to the application) that due to some dispute, the impugned accusations were made by the prosecutrix and he also conceded the fact that on 21.03.2019 police reached on the spot, but no written complaint was made by the prosecutrix side against the applicant.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as totality of fact and circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Jeet Lal Saroj be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 1.11.2019 S. Shivhare