Ravi Pathak v. State of U.P

Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45668 of 2023 Applicant :- Ravi Pathak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi,Saurabh Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A,Ajay Kumar Chaurasia Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶1List revised.

¶2Heard Sri Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Kumar Chaurasia, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Bare Lal Bind, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶3This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Ravi Pathak, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 360 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 376, 328, 506 I.P.C. registered at P.S. Khandauli, District Agra.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that although the applicant is named in the F.I.R. along with 7 other accused persons and there is allegation of all the accused persons committing rape upon the victim but the same has been changed by the victim in the statements under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. It is argued that the victim is a major woman aged about 24 years and she was studying with the applicant and was his friend. She states in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the applicant giving her cold drink mixed with some intoxicating substance after which she states to become semi unconscious and then the applicant established physical relationship with her and made a video of it whereas in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she states that the applicant and herself solemnizing marriage and then establishing physical relationship after which the applicant is stated to have made video and was blackmailing her. The matter was tried to be settled between the family but could not materialize. It is argued that subsequently the applicant is stated to have settled his marriage with someone else. It is argued that no such video has been recovered by the Investigating Officer during investigation. It is argued that version of the prosecution is different in all the 03 documents being the F.I.R., the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It is argued that the applicant has no other criminal antecedents as stated in para-6 of the affidavit and is in jail since 20.09.2023.

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

¶6After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the version of the F.I.R. is not consistent and three versions of the victim in the F.I.R., under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. are totally different to each other. The victim is a major woman aged about 24 years. In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she states of marrying with the applicant. No such video, as alleged, has been recovered by the Investigating Officer during investigation.

¶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-Ravi Pathak, 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. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 9.11.2023/Naresh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad