Sudhir Kumar Pasi vs State Of Uttar Pradesh

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Sudhir Kumar Pasi for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 433 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 436 I.P.C, Police Station Laharpur, District Sitapur, during trial.

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

It is further submitted that initially the F.I.R. in the instant case was filed by the informant alleging the offence of rape with her daughter-in-law and the F.I.R. against the instant applicant and other four co-accused persons was registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 376, 504, 304, 436, 511 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of S.C./S.T. Act. However, after investigation of the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. with regard to the rape as well as of causing of grievous hurt have not been found truthful and the investigating officer has submitted the charge-sheet against the applicant only under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 436 I.P.C. and rest of the co-accused persons have also been exonerated by the investigating officer.

Highlighting the above facts, it has been vehemently submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that filing of the charge-sheet only against the applicant under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 436 I.P.C is primafacie evident of the fact that the First Information Report by the informant was lodged on false and concocted facts and, therefore, the story of putting the house of the informant on fire by the applicant could also not be believed.

It is further submitted that the instant F.I.R. is nothing but a counter-blast of the F.I.R. which was lodged by the informant Kamta against Dhunna, Chail Bihari, Mahesh and Kuldeep (son of the informant of the instant case) on 20.07.2020, under Section 363 and 366 I.P.C. alleging that the above accused persons had enticed away and abducted his daughter (real cousin sister of the applicant). However, in that case as a compromise had arrived between the parties and the final report was submitted by the investigating officer and the accused persons of that case including the son of the informant of the instant case namely Kuldeep were in search of an opportunity whereby they could revenge and by filing the instant First Information Report they have succeeded in their design and, therefore, the instant F.I.R. is nothing but the counter-blast of the F.I.R. earlier lodged by the real uncle of the applicant.

It is further submitted that the statement of the prosecution witnesses could not be believed in the background of the fact that the investigating officer has also opined in the case diary that the accused persons of Case Crime No. 243 of 2020 had misbehaved with father of the applicant and to avoid any liability they have lodged the instant F.I.R. The applicant is in jail in this matter since 07.11.2020 and is not having any criminal history and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer for bail of the applicant on the ground that he has committed a heinous offence and, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the F.I.R. in the instant case was lodged by the informant Medhai against the applicant and other four co-accused persons under Sections 147, 148, 149, 376, 308, 323, 504, 304, 436, 511 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of S.C./S.T. Act. However, after investigation of the case the charge-sheet has only been filed under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 436 I.P.C. and only against applicant. It has been stated on behalf of the applicant that earlier Case Crime No. 243 of 2020, under Section 363 and 366 I.P.C. was lodged by the real uncle of the applicant namely Kamta against Dhunna, Chail Bihari, Mahesh and Kuldeep (husband of the prosecutrix). However, a compromise had taken place between the parties in that case and final report was submitted and the instant case is nothing but the counter blast of the same. Applicant is in jail in this matter since 07.11.2020. Charge-sheet in this case has already been submitted and the presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by imposing suitable conditions.

Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I find substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant for the purpose of releasing the applicant on bail. The bail application is, thus, allowed.

Let the applicant- Sudhir Kumar Pasi involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

(i) The applicant will not attempt to contact either the informant or the prosecutrix of the instant case.

(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

(iii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

(iv) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

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

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.