Allahabad High Court
Sudhir Chaudhary vs State Of U.P. & Anr. on 16 August, 2021
Author: Alok Mathur
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 15 Case :- BAIL No. - 2396 of 2021 Applicant :- Sudhir Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava,Bishnu Kumar Verma,Vashu Deo Mishra,Vinay Kumar Rawat Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Vashu Deo Mishra, learned counsel for applicant as well as learned A.G.A.
2. This bail application has been filed by the applicant who is an accused in Case Crime No. 171/2020, under Section 323, 504, 506, 376, 511 I.P.C. & Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act & 18 POCSO At, Police Station - Gurbuxganj, District - Raebareli.
3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that the F.I.R. has been lodged by the prosecuctrix herself stating that in the evening of the date of incident she has gone to ease herself next to the canal, the applicant had accosted her and attempted to molest her consequent to which the first information report was lodged. In the statement, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has reiterated the contents of the first information report and stated that the applicant had caught hold her and when she shouted then he ran away. In the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. she had also stated that she had gone along with her elder sister (didi) and her friend Roshni. Subsequently, in the statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. the story has been altered and she has stated that the applicant tried to drag after putting a cloth in her mouth and attempted to rape her and on hearing her shouts, the villagers came and on seeing the villagers, the applicant ran away. According to the medical determination, the age of the prosecutrix is 16 years while according to the educational record, her age is about 14 years.
4. He further submits that even from the reading of the first information report and the statements recorded during investigation, there is no allegation of sexual assault and at best it is the case of either molestation or false attempt of rape. He has further submitted that there is previous enmity between the applicant and the prosecutrix consequent to which false case is set up against the applicant. It has been submitted that even in the medical report, it does not indicate any injury and the applicant is languishing in jail since 08.09.2020 and thereby he has spent nearly 11 months in jail. The counsel contends that there is no possibility of the applicant fleeing away from justice or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
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 fact that there is previous enmity between the prosecutrix and the applicant and the statement of the prosecutrix has constantly been wavering where initially she was accompanied only by her friend and subsequently she was said that elder sister (didi) was there along with her and the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
7. Let applicant/Sudhir Chaudhary be released on bail in aforesaid case 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. The application stands disposed of.
10. This order shall not influence the trial court for proceeding the trial.
11. The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by him alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
12. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 16.8.2021 Ravi/