Allahabad High Court
Manoj Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 22 February, 2023
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2657 of 2023 Applicant :- Manoj Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh,Raj Kiran Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Om Prakash Shukla Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Om Prkash Shukla, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
There are allegations against the applicant of committing the offences of beating, threatening, outraging modesty of the victim and also committing offence of gang rape after entering into house of victim.
Learned counsel for the submits that it is case of false implication and malicious prosecution against the Jeth of the victim. Earlier she implicated him along with all the family members of her matrimonial home for committing offence under Sections 498A I.P.C. 19.03.2021. However, the entire family members of her matrimonial home was exonerated by the police, except mother-in-law and husband of the victim. Thereafter the present implication has been made by lodging first information report dated 15.12.2021 with regard to incident dated 05.12.2021, initially alleging the offence under Section 323, 504, 506, 452, 354, 354B I.P.C. Subsequently, applicant has been implicated for offence under Section 376(D) I.P.C. From the perusal of the allegation made in the first information report it is clear that the victim has not disclosed her relation-ship with the applicant in the first information report. She has alleged against the applicant that he used to follow her and make obscene comments. Thereafter the victim protested and the applicant and two other accused persons entered into the house and committed alleged offence of outraging her modesty as per first information report. Subsequently, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C she has made allegation of commission of offence of gang rape against the applicant and has assigned the main role to him. Learned counsel for the applicant submits after the earlier incident victim had left her matrimonial house. Present incident is alleged to have been caused in the house of her Mausi, where the applicant cannot go for the purpose of committing offence keeping in view the earlier implication. He has been falsely implicated as he was exonerated by the investigating officer in earlier case under Section 498-A I.P.C. Applicant is in jail since 26.07.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Manoj Yadav, involved in Case Crime No.620 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 354, 354B, 376D I.P.C, Police Station Cantt., District- Varanasi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.
(v) 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 22.2.2023 SS