Subhash vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Dinesh Kumar Singh, J

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate and gone through the entire record.

By means of this application under Section 439 CrPC, the accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR No.0345 of 2022, under Sections 366 and 376 IPC lodged at Police Station Kheron, District Raebareli.

Initially, the FIR was lodged under Sections 363 and 366 IPC with the allegation that the accused-applicant enticed away the prosecutrix on 09.07.2022; the prosecutrix also took with her Rs.50,000/- cash and some jewellery; the prosecutrix was recovered on 17.07.2022; in her statement, recorded under Section 161 CrPC, the prosecutrix said that she was abducted and raped by the accused-applicant. It was further alleged that the accused-applicant had taken Rs.50,000/- from the prosecutrix and some gold jewellery; the prosecutrix had also given statement under Section 164 CrPC to the same effect, which was recorded on 25.07.2022; age of the prosecutrix, as per medical evidence, is 21-22 years; the accused-applicant is also aged around 20-21 years.

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that it was a consensual act of the prosecutrix, who came out of her home with cash and jewellery and went with the accused-applicant, however, on pressure of her family member, she lodged the FIR

Mr. Ashwan Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate, has not disputed the fact that the prosecutrix was 21-22 years of age; she came out of her home with cash and jewellery.

Considering all the facts & circumstances of the case and without commenting upon merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the accused-applicant on bail, who is languishing in jail since 04.09.2022.

Let applicant-Subhas, accused of above-mentioned FIR/crime number, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local and reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions, which are imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) the applicant shall not try to come to contact of the prosecutrix at any point of time, either through phone or in person and he shall cooperate with the trial so that it gets concluded;

(i-a) the applicant(s) 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(s) 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(s) misuse(s) the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant(s) fail(s) 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; and

(iv) the applicant(s) 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.