Allahabad High Court
Rambaran @ Nanhe vs State Of U.P. on 21 September, 2020
Author: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 24 Case :- BAIL No. - 1173 of 2020 Applicant :- Rambaran @ Nanhe Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Puttu Lal Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State through video conferencing.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 6.12.2019 in Case Crime No. 0232 of 2019 u/s 376, 506, 457 IPC, P.S. Raniganj, District Pratapgarh.
On account of prosecution story narrated in the F.I.R. dated 28.7.2019 the present applicant has committed rape on 25.7.2019 with the prosecutrix who is aged about 35 years of age having two children. Further, the husband of the prosecutrix has allegedly left her and has eloped with one lady of the same village, therefore, the prosecutrix was living alone. As per allegation of the F.I.R. the prosecutrix was running one small shop in her house to sell the petty necessary commodities including Gutka / Pan Masala and the applicant came to her shop and asked for Gutka at about 11.00 P.M. and when the prosecutrix denied to give Gutka he raped her. Further, the prosecutrix could not alarm as the applicant pushed his hand on the mouth of the prosecutrix. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that this is a false story narrated by the prosecutrix as he has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated. He has drawn attention of the Court towards the statement of the prosecutrix under section 164 Cr.P.C. whereby she has changed the story by saying that the applicant is son of his sister-in-law (Jethani) whose name she does not know. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the story is highly improbable inasmuch as if the applicant was son of his Jethani, the prosecutrix may be knowing her name but the name of Jethani is not indicated in the statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. as the prosecutrix said that the prosecutrix does not know the name of Jethani. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of the Court towards para 15 of the rejoinder affidavit whereby he has categorically submitted that the statement of said Jethani has not been recorded by the police u/s 161 Cr.P.C. As per learned counsel for the applicant no such Jethani was existing, therefore, the statement has not been recorded. He has further drawn attention of the Court towards the statement of mother-in-law of the prosecutrix (Annexure R.A.-2) who lives in the same house has submitted that she could not know any mis-happening, if occurred at night.
On the strength of aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that this is a false story narrated in the F.I.R. as the lady aged about 35 years is much able to raise alarm and make protest, if someone attempts to commit rape. In the present case there is no protest on the part of the prosecutrix. He has further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the case and trial is going on. He shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant Rambaran @ Nanhe, involved in Case Crime No. 0232 of 2019 u/s 376, 506, 457 IPC, P.S. Raniganj, District Pratapgarh 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(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.
Order Date :- 21.9.2020/Om [Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.]