Allahabad High Court
Sanjay @ Pauni vs State Of U.P.And Anr. on 15 June, 2021
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 18 Case :- BAIL No. - 3248 of 2020 Applicant :- Sanjay @ Pauni Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Pratap Singh,Ashok Kumar Singh,Nitin,Rahul Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The matter is taken up through video conferencing.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 26.02.2020. It is also submitted that the prosecutrix is a consenting party. The occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 30.5.2015 and the F.I.R. has been lodged after inordinate delay on 18.06.2015 without there being any explanation.
It is further submitted that as per the radiological report, the age of the prosecutrix is 16 to 18 years and i.e. why both of them were married in Arya Samaj Mandir, copy of marriage certificate is on record, thereafter both of them filed a writ petition No. 5258 (M/B) of 2015 before this Court which was disposed vide order dated 17.06.2015 observing that both of them are married and there is no reason to interfere in their matrimonial life by the police officials. After the order dated 17.06.2015 was passed by the Division Bench of this Court, in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix made no allegation against the applicant and also accepted the relationship and the marriage with the applicant. This statement was given after the order passed by the Division Bench.
It is further submitted that the prosecutrix is major, however, the pressure exerted by the family members of the complainant while giving statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 21.07.2015 for the first time levelled the allegation of rape against the present applicant. It is also submitted that the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. are contradictory and are not worthy of credence without there being any corroborative material.
It is further submitted that charge sheet in the matter has already been filed.
It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
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.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which he is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Let the applicant, Sanjay @ Pauni, involved in Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 252/2015, under Sections 363/366/376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Kakori, District - Lucknow, 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 will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
(vi) 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.
Order Date :- 15.6.2021/R.C.