Shalu v. State of U.P

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39245 of 2023 Applicant :- Shalu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Shiromani Yadav,Javed Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ritesh Singh Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record. Counsel for the applicant does not wishes to file rejoinder affidavit. Counsel for the applicant is permitted to correct the prayer of the bail application and include Section 376-D IPC therein within the course of day. Heard Sri Javed Khan, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Ritesh Singh, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State. There is allegation against the applicant of abduction of a minor girl and her unlawful confinement. The implication for committing the offence of gang rape and criminal intimidation has also been made. Counsel for the applicant submits that the victim willingly eloped with the applicant and co-accused and thereafter came back. In the FIR, no allegation of gang rape was alleged nor in the statement initially recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. No such allegation was made in the first statement of victim recorded before the doctor. She has stated that she was abducted by two boys and taken to an open field and after given something to smell she became unconscious and was subjected to the offence of gang rape. However in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., she has stated that she was taken to the dilapidated house of Pramod son of Mahavir Singh. Counsel for the applicant also submits that it is a case of false implication of t he applicant. The victim is a major girl. She has falsely implicated the applicant. She eloped with the applicant and co-accused willingly. She has not clearly stated the place of incident. The applicant is in jail since 04.08.2023 and has no criminal history to his credit. On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail. Keeping 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. Let the applicant, Shalu, involved in Case Crime No. 242 of 2023, under Sections-366, 376-D, 342, 506 IPC, Police Station-Rajpura, District-Sambhal, 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. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 22.11.2023 Rohit High Court of Judicature at Allahabad