Allahabad High Court
Dileep Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 9 November, 2022
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 75 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42401 of 2022 Applicant :- Dileep Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kanchan Chaudhary Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri V.K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Kanchan Chaudhary, learned counsel for opposite party no.4, Sri Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Dileep Singh with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.243 of 2022, under Sections 363, 376-DA I.P.C. and section 3/4 (2) of POCSO Act, Police Station-Madnapur, District-Shahjahanpur during pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per version of the FIR which has been lodged by the father of the victim, in the night of 12-13 May, 2022 at about 3 0' clock, when his daughter went for a natural call and did not return, he tried to search her and came to know that applicant along with co-accused Harshit has enticed away her daughter being assisted by two other persons. For the aforesaid, the FIR was lodged on 13.05.2022. In the FIR, the age of the victim has been mentioned as 17 years. The victim was recovered on the date of lodging of the FIR i.e. 13.05.2022 and sent for medical examination where she stated before the doctor that the accused persons have not done any wrong to her. In her statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., she has stated that she is 19 years old and she was friendly with Harshit, one of the accused persons and wants to marry him. For the aforesaid reason, she left her house on 13.05.2022 along with Harshit. She was caught by the police persons on her way and was brought for her medical examination. In her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., she has totally changed the story in order to falsely implicated the applicant, reason being that she was informed by her father that her father is facing trial for murder of uncle of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that even if the entire story narrated in the statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. is believed, the same does not corroborate with the medical examination report. It is next argued that applicant has no criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.06.2022, accordingly, he requests for bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.4 vehemently opposed the prayer for bail by contending that innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail.
Considering the nature of the offence, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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:-
(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 are 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.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 9.11.2022 Madhurima