Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 2305 (ALL)

Krishna Kumar @ Motey v. State of U. P.

2015-08-10

MAHENDRA DAYAL

body2015
JUDGMENT Mahendra Dayal,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The applicant Krishna Kumar alias Motey has sought bail in Crime No.2465/2013, under Sections 366, 376, 392, 306 IPC relating to police station Kotwali Nagar, District Sultanpur. 3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecutrix as per the medical examination report is about 25 years of age. Since the prosecutrix was major, therefore, her allegation that she was enticed away by the applicant cannot be sustained. Further submission is that the manner in which she had gone with the applicant indicates that she had gone with her consent. It has also been submitted on behalf of the applicant that the prosecutrix lived with the applicant for about seventeen days at Ludhiyana without any resistance. She has also not raised any alarm during her travel from the place of occurrence to Ludhiyana. After about a month of the occurrence, the prosecutrix committed suicide and the offence of Section 306 IPC was also added against the applicant while there was absolutely no evidence to the effect that the applicant instigated the deceased to commit suicide. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and as such the offence under Section 394 cannot be made out against the applicant. It is also a submission that the prosecutrix was not recovered from the possession of the applicant. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but it is not disputed that the prosecutrix was about 25 years of age at the time of occurrence. She has not made any allegation that any force was used while taking her away. It is also not disputed that she lived with the applicant about seventeen days without any resistance. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid facts, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant Krishna Kumar alias Motey involved in the aforesaid case crime number 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 with the 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 sufficient 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 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.