Mayur Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7186 of 2023 Applicant :- Mayur Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anuj Mishra,Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶1Supplementary afÏdavit filed by learned counsel for applicant is taken on record.

¶2Heard Shri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as Ms. MVS Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3This bail application has been filed seeking release of accused/applicant Mayur Shukla on bail, who is involved in Case Crime No. 0821 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. & 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Ayodhya.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant submitted before the Court that P.W.-2, the prosecutrix, has been declared hostile and she has deposed before the Court that she herself had left her house and the applicant did not entice her. She further deposed that the applicant did not establish physical relation with her and she never met him. She was informed by the inspector that her father had lodged the First Information Report against the applicant and he called her therefore, she had gone to the police station. Further, she has denied the entire version of statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C, as well as statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C and has deposed that at the behest of her father and the police, she had given her statement before the trial court It has been further submitted by learned counsel for applicant that the entire version of prosecution case has been denied by the prosecutrix, in her cross-examination. Similarly, P.W.-1, the father of prosecutrix has also not supported the prosecution case in his cross-examination.

¶5It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that once the fact witnesses have been examined and they have not supported the case, presumption goes in favour of the applicant and at the present moment, it cannot be inferred that the applicant has committed any crime as the entire version of the F.I.R has been denied by the P.W.-2. He further stated that there is no criminal history against the applicant and he is in jail since

24.03.2023.

¶6Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute that P.W.-2 has become hostile and P.W.-1 has not supported the prosecution case.

¶7Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record, considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the argument that P.W.-2, the prosecutrix, in her cross-examination, has denied the entire version of F.I.R and has not supported the prosecution case and P.W.-1, the father of prosecutrix has not supported the prosecution case, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail.

¶8Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶9Let the accused/applicant Mayur Shukla involved in above-mentioned case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to 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 sufÏcient 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 sufÏcient 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 :- 19.12.2023 DiVYa High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench