Dharmendra Kumar v. State of U.P

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31696 of 2023 Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶2Ossification test report of the victim has been received which shows that she is aged about 17 years.

¶3There are allegations against the applicant of outraging modesty of minor girl, commission of offences of beating, criminal intimidation, rape, etc.

¶4Counsel for the applicant submits that in the FIR no time and date of the incident has been mentioned. The victim has admitted in her statement that she knows the applicant for last one year and used to talk to him.

¶5Counsel for the applicant has pointed out to the statement of the independent witnesses which shows that on account of affair between the victim and the applicant quarrel used to take place between their families. Thereafter FIR was lodged. He has submitted that the applicant and victim were consenting party. Because of dispute between their families, the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant is in jail since

09.05.2023 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶6On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶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, Dharmendra Kumar, involved in Case Crime No. 217 of 2023, under Sections-354, 323, 504, 506, 325, 376 IPC, Police Station-Bansgaon, District-Gorakhpur, 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 :- 30.10.2023 Rohit High Court of Judicature at Allahabad