Manjeet Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civilsecrett. Lko. and 3 Others

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9744 of 2023 Applicant :- Manjeet Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civilsecrett. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Maurya,Vikas Vikram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶1Notice has been served on opposite party no.2 but none has appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 to press the bail application .

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Vikram Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶3The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.61 of 2023, under sections 363, 366, 376 IPC & Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Shivratanganj, District Amethi.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has invited attention of this Court towards the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she deposed before the court that the applicant is her neighbor and she was in love with the applicant and she had gone to Punjab alongwith him where his parents were residing. She further deposed that she performed marriage with applicant in a temple on 25.03.2023 and thereafter physical relation was established and was living as wife. She further deposed before the court that she wants to live with the applicant and the applicant did not entice her. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as per radiological finding and general appearance, the age of the prosecutrix is 18 years whereas as per school certificate, the age of the prosecutrix is 16 years and 7 months. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the prosecutrix has refused her internal examination. Learned counsel for the applicant has invited attention of this Court towards Parcha no.9 of the Case Diary which indicates that the prosecutrix has refused to go alongwith her parents thereafter she was sent to Shelter Home Amethi. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it is not case of rape and as per radiological findings, she is aged about 18 years. The applicant has no previous criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tempering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 18.04.2023.

¶5On the other hand, Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that as per school certificate the age of the prosecutrix is 16 years and 7 months ,therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶6Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking into overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as the argument that radiological report indicates that the prosecutrix was 18 years at the relevant time, the argument that she deposed before the court that she was in love with the applicant and she performed marriage with the applicant and the argument that there is no ingredients of rape as define under section 375 IPC, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶7Let the applicant, namely,Manjeet Kumar, be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

(i) 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.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) 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.

(iv) 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. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order. Order Date :- 16.10.2023 dk/ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench