Allahabad High Court
Krishna Murari Patel vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 February, 2020
Author: Vivek Kumar Singh
Bench: Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8231 of 2020 Applicant :- Krishna Murari Patel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suraj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Suraj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material brought on record.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive just to harass the applicant. There is huge contradiction in the statement of victim u/s 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. As per medical report victim is a major girl and from the statement of the victim she was confined in a room for a period of 15-20 days with the applicant but she did not raise any alarm. The Apex Court in the case of Rajak Mohd. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.1395 of 2015 vide order dated 23.08.2018 has held that where the prosecutrix lived with the accused and freely moved around with the accused where she came across many people at different points of time but never complained of any criminal act, the conviction of the accused under Section 363, 366, 376 I.P.C was held to be unwarranted in law. Further submission is that applicant who is in jail since 29.11.2019 has no other criminal history and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant also undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any view on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicant Krishna Murari Patel be released on bail in S.S.T. No. 8/2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 244 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC & Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012, Police Station- Kapsethi, District- Varanasi on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release. (ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India and another reported in AIR 2018 (SC) 2440, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 24.2.2020 Arti