Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

8. 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.

9. The bail application is allowed.

10. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of adjudicating the present bail application.

11. However, considering contrary stand of the victim, Trial Court is directed to initiate summary proceedings against victim for giving false evidence as provided under Section 344 Cr.P.C. at appropriate stage and in this regard it would be appropriate to refer the relevant paragraphs of judgments passed by Supreme Court in Hemudan Nanbha Gadhvi vs. State of Gujarat, (2019) 17 SCC 523 and Mahila Vinod Kumari Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2008) 8 SCC 34:

Mahila Vinod Kumari :-

"8. In the present case, on the basis of the allegations made by the petitioner, two persons were arrested and had to face trial and suffered the ignominy of being involved in a serious offence like rape. Their acquittal, may, to a certain extent, have washed away the stigma, but that is not enough. The purpose of enacting Section 344 CrPC corresponding to Section 479-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (hereinafter referred to as "the old Code") appears to be to further arm the court with a weapon to deal with more flagrant cases and not to take away the weapon already in its possession. The object of the legislature underlying enactment of the provision is that the evil of perjury and fabrication of evidence has to be eradicated and can be better achieved now as it is open to courts to take recourse to Section 340(1) (corresponding to Section 476 of the Old Code) in cases in which they have failed to take action under Section 344 CrPC.