Monu Pal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11880 of 2023 Applicant :- Monu Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Sakal Yadav,Ram Bachan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶1Heard Sri Ram Bachan Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶2There is allegation against the applicant of abduction of minor girl with intent to marry, commission of offences of rape, conspiracy and penetrative sexual assault. The victim belongs to schedule caste.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The victim is related to the applicant. It is a case of false implication. The applicant is in jail since 22.01.2023 and has no criminal history to his credit. He has pointed out to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., wherefrom it is clear that applicant is the son-in-law of bua of the victim. He is a married man and illegally abducted the victim and taken her to Meerut and and raped her then married her to co-accused, Roshan. She alleges that she lived with the applicant as his wife for one month and thereafter she was got married to co-accused, Roshan. In the statement of the victim before the doctor also she has made similar allegation against the applicant. The victim claimed her age as 17 years. As per radiological examination report, she is aged about 18 to 20 years.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The victim had consenting relationship with co-accused, Roshan, and she married him against against the wife of applicant. Hence the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case by victim.

¶6Learned A.G.A has opposed the bail application of the applicant.

¶7Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials 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.

¶8Let the applicant, Monu Pal, involved in Case Crime No. 168 of 2022, under Section-363 IPC, Police Station-Marihan, District-Mirzapur, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) 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.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) 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.

(v) 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.

¶9In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶10Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 19.10.2023 Rohit High Court of Judicature at Allahabad