Ravindra v. State of U.P

Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46347 of 2023 Applicant :- Ravindra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶1Heard Sri Rajesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶2This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Ravindra, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 303 of 2023, under Sections 376 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Mehnagar, District Azamgarh.

¶3The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 13.07.2023 by the victim herself against the applicant alleging therein that the applicant used to visit her house, used to enrage her modesty and clicked her photographs. He then by threatening her committed rape upon her and threatened of dire consequences.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the victim is a major girl. She has disclosed her age as 20 years in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It is argued that the victim and the applicant were known to each other since last six months. The marriage of victim was settled somewhere else after which it is stated that the applicant showed her objectionable photographs to Anil Sonkar with whom her marriage was fixed due to which the said marriage was broken. It is argued that there is no recovery of any such video or photographs from the possession of the applicant. Paragraph 13 of the affidavit has been placed for the same. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 19 of the affidavit and is in jail since

13.07.2023.

¶5Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶6After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim and the applicant were known to each other since last six months. There is no recovery of the alleged objectionable video of the victim. As per the certificate of the Chief Medical Officer concerned the victim was opined to be above 18 years and below 20 years of age and as such she is a major.

¶7Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶8Let the applicant-Ravindra, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶9The 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.

¶10The bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 2.11.2023 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad