Allahabad High Court
Navlesh And Another vs State Of U.P. on 2 August, 2019
Author: Ali Zamin
Bench: Ali Zamin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5235 of 2019 Applicant :- Navlesh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 899 of 2018, under Sections 376-D, 452, 506 of IPC, at Police Station Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to prosecution version, on 29.10.2018 at about 7:00 P.M. two boys (applicants) namely Navlesh and Jai Prakash came and in the absence of the informant they committed rape with his wife and threatened to dire consequences if she alarms. As soon as his wife got opportunity, came out of the home and narrated the incident to her family members, then, the family members caught them and reported to the police. He submits that as per her statement she had washed her clothes so nothing adverse has been found. In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has stated that earlier also they committed misdeed with her with her consent that is why she has not reported to the police. He further submits that the applicants and husband of the victim does the business of sale and purchase of goats and often they used to stay at the house of the victim. The applicants had gone before the incident at the house of the victim and stayed there in the night. Their money was stolen. When they asked about the money, then, falsely they have been implicated in this case. There is no possibility of the applicants of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicants are enlarged on bail, the applicants shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no previous criminal history of the applicants and they are languishing in jail since 30.10.2018.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the bail prayer and submits that in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has supported the prosecution version about the incident, although in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has also stated that earlier also the applicants committed misdeed with her with her own consent that is why she had not reported to the police.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicants are entitled for bail, let the applicants- Navlesh and Jai Prakash involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-
1. The applicants shall not tamper or pressurize the prosecution evidence.
2. The applicants shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.
3. The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants 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 them in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 2.8.2019 LBY