Allahabad High Court
Kedar Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 15 September, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 81 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37637 of 2022 Applicant :- Kedar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Bhushan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Maurya Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pradeep Misra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rajesh Maurya, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 219 of 2022, under Sections 376,506 IPC, Police Station Sidhari, District Azamgarh, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The FIR of this case has been lodged by the complainant on 28.5.2022 against the co-accused Shivam Yadav alleging therein that he has committed rape upon her and he has threatened that in case she discloses the incident to anyone, he will kill her.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The applicant is absolutely innocent and is an old person aged about 69 years. As per the medical report of the applicant, he is a heart and neuro patient. The angioplasty of the applicant was done in March, 2020 and the neuro surgery was performed in November, 2021 and his treatment is going on, which has been annexed as Annexure-6. The name of the applicant has been disclosed by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. She has stated in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that the applicant has committed wrongful act with her. The allegation of rape has been made against his grandson (Shivam Yadav). Therefore, the applicant has no concern with the alleged crime and has been falsely implicated only because there was dispute relating to transaction of money between both the parties. It is further submitted that there is no allegation of rape against the applicant therefore, the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of other co-accused. It is next submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 24.7.2022. It is also submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail by contending that the specific allegation against the applicant has been made in the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P. The innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22, and recent judgement dated 11.7.2022 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 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 Kedar Yadav involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.
1. The applicant shall co-operate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
2. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
4. The applicant 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
5. 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his 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.
Order Date :- 15.9.2022 M. Tarik