Raunak Singh v. State of U.P

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32245 of 2023 Applicant :- Raunak Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arun Kumar Singh Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶1Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Arun Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶2Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶3There is allegation in the FIR against the applicant and three named and one unnamed accused regarding commission of offences of intoxication, gang rape, beating and criminal intimidation of the victim. The allegation against the applicant is that victim has lodged an FIR under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 377 IPC. The applicant is pressurizing her to withdraw the aforesaid case, otherwise he will implicate her and her brother in false case and commit her murder. On 11.02.2023 he came to her house and beated her. Photograph of the incident was recorded by her brother. Thereafter the co-accused, Golu Awasthi and two others beated her brother and tried to abduct her five months old boy. Applicant took the victim in a car to a hotel where he had got a room booked earlier and after making her consume intoxicated tea the applicant and co-accused, Golu Awasthi and two others made physical relation with her and also videographed the same. On the basis of aforesaid videograph, co-accused, Raunak Singh, threatened her to with draw the case. The hotel staff was colluding with co-accused persons and therefore the C.C.T.V footage was deleted. The room was booked on the basis of fabricated I.D. Hence, FIR was lodged.

¶4Counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication. Earlier the victim had given an application dated

13.02.2023 regarding the alleged incident 11.02.2023 to the Police Commissioner which after investigation was found to be false. The hotel staff was examined by the investigating officer and they did not testified to the presence of victim in the hotel. No vediograph or photograph of the victim along the applicant has been recovered. On account of enmity between two groups the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no independent witness of the incident. The victim is a major woman and why she accompanied the applicant to the hotel and what was the purpose of the same is required to be explained by her. The applicant is in jail since 17.06.2023 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶5On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶6Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶7Let the applicant, Raunak Singh, involved in Case Crime No. 39 of 2023, under Sections-420, 328, 376-D, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station-Collectorganj, District-Kanpur Nagar, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) 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.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) 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.

(v) 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.

¶8In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶9Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 9.11.2023 Rohit High Court of Judicature at Allahabad