Praveen Kumar Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14740 of 2023 Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vaibhav Tripathi Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vaibhav Tripathi, learned counsel who has filed his power today on behalf of complainant, Ms. Priyanka Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused record.

¶2The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.260 of 2023 under Section 376-AB IPC Section 5J (II)/6 of POCSO Act and Section 3 (2) (V) of SC/ST/ Act, PS Tarabganj, district Gonda.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that prosecutrix has not supported the prosecution case. She has deposed before the Court that on the threat given by the villagers report was lodged in the police station and the police had threatened her to make statement. She has further deposed that statement under Section 164 CrPC was also given before the Magistrate under threat of police. She had denied entire version and stated that no rape was committed by the applicant against her. Similarly, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that statement of PW-1 brother of prosecutrix has also been recorded and he has also not supported the prosecution case. He has submitted that at the moment, looking to the statement of PW-1 and PW-2, it cannot be inferred that the applicant was involved in commission of crime. He has submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is in Jail since 16.7.2023.

¶4Learned counsel for the complainant has not disputed that the PW-1 and PW-2 have not supported the prosecution case. Learned A.G.A. also could not dispute the fact that PW-1 and PW-2 have not supported the prosecution case.

¶5Considering over all facts and circumstances of the case, the argument that PW-1 and PW-2 have not supported the prosecution case, it is a fit case for bail.

¶6Let the applicant, Praveen Kumar Mishra 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.

¶7It 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 :- 14.12.2023 Rajneesh JR-PS) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench