Anil Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14665 of 2023 Applicant :- Anil Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. Surendra Kumar Misra,Avnish Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Priyam Kumar Singh Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶1Vakalatnama filed by Shri Priyam Kumar Singh, Advocate on behalf of complainant is taken on record.

¶2This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected by this Court on 27.07.2023. After rejection of first bail application, the prosecutrix PW1 and her father PW2 have been examined by the trial Court and new cause of action has arisen therefore, the present bail application has been filed.

¶3Heard Dr. Surendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri MVS Chauhan, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶4The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.0308 of 2022, under Sections-376 (3) I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S.- Phoolbehar, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶5It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecutrix has been examined by trial court and she has deposed that she and her father did not go to police Station and she had not stated before the police that applicant did wrong against her. She denied the entire version of the statement given before the police. She further deposed that statement which was recorded before the Magistrate was given under the duress and pressure created by the police, thus, under police pressure, she implicated the applicant. The prosecutrix has denied the entire version of the prosecution case as well as the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

¶6Learned counsel further contended that similarly, PW2 father of the prosecutrix has been declared hostile by the trial Court and has not not supported the prosecution case in cross examination. Learned counsel submitted that the main witnesses having become hostile therefore, at this moment it cannot be inferred in any manner that the applicant ha committed offence. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 30.06.2022.

¶7Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid contention stated by the learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecutrix and her father both have not supported the prosecution case in the cross examination.

¶8Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that both prosecutrix and her father have not supported the prosecution case in their cross examination, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶9Let the applicant, Anil Yadav, 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.

¶10It 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 :- 13.12.2023 Pks High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench