Pramod Kumar v. State of U.P

Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36693 of 2023 Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shailesh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Priya Ranjan Rai Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶1List revised.

¶2Heard Sri Shailesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Priya Ranjan Rai, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel 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 Pramod Kumar, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 142 of 2023, under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kandharapur, District Azamgarh.

¶4The FIR of the matter was lodged on 04.06.2023 by the victim herself against the applicant alleging therein that she is working as A.N.M. in CHC Centre, Atrauliya. While in employment she met the applicant who was working in 102 Ambulance. He on a false promise to marry established relationship with her. When she asked to marry her he being tried to avoid. When she strongly asked to marry her he threatened her by showing her objectionable photographs, blackmailed her and demanded money from her.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the victim is a major lady. The relationship between the applicant and the victim was a consensual relationship on some discussion of marriage between them but the same could not materialize and as such the present FIR has been lodged. It is argued that in so far as the alleged objectionable photographs are concerned, no such photographs have been recovered by the Investigating Officer during investigation. There is no prosecution of the applicant under the Information Technology Act. It is argued that charge sheet in the matter has been submitted against the applicant and as such there are no chances of the applicant tampering with evidence. He further argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 15 of the affidavit and is in jail since 05.06.2023.

¶6Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the FIR and there are allegations against him.

¶7After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is a major lady. The relationship between the applicant and the victim was a consensual relationship on some discussion of marriage between them but the same could not materialize. The alleged photographs have not recovered by the Investigating Officer during investigation.

¶8Looking 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.

¶9Let the applicant Pramod Kumar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (one of the sureties of the applicant will be his family member and the other to be of local person) 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.

¶10The 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.

¶11The bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 23.11.2023 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad