Kop Singh v. State of U.P

Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50676 of 2023 Applicant :- Kop Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Meraj Ahmad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶1List revised.

¶2Heard Sri Meraj Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, 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 Kop Singh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 112 of 2023, under Sections 452, 376 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Asmoli, District Sambhal.

¶4The FIR of the matter was lodged on 16.04.2023 by Smt. Mamtesh against the applicant alleging therein that on 15.04.2023 at about 08:00 pm her daughter aged about 18 years had gone from the house to bring the cattles where the applicant with an ill intention caught hold of her hand took her in a room and committed rape upon her. She came back to the house and told her mother about the incident. When her husband came she told him about it and then the FIR has been lodged.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the trial in the present matter has started in which the victim before the trial court was examined as PW-2 in which she has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. She has specifically stated that the applicant did not commit any such incident of rape upon her. The certified copy of the statement has been placed before the Court which is at page 63 of the paper book. It is argued that as per the FIR, the victim is a major girl. It is argued that the medical examination report does not support the prosecution story. He further argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 14 of the affidavit and is in jail since 17.04.2023.

¶6Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶7After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the victim was examined before the trial court as PW-2 in which the victim has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. The victim is a major girl as stated in the FIR. The medical report does not support the prosecution story.

¶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 Kop Singh, 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.

¶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.

¶11Since the prosecutrix has completely denied the prosecution version, the applicant not doing any wrongful act on her, she is not entitled to the benefit of any compensation paid by the State Government which has been collected from the taxpayers of the country. The trial court will consider issuance of a direction against the prosecutrix to refund the amount received by her as compensation, if any, in the appropriate head of the treasury account.

¶12The bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 28.11.2023 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad