Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 904 (ALL)

Jamaluddin @ Jalaluddin v. State of U. P.

2015-04-20

RAMESH SINHA

body2015
JUDGMENT Ramesh Sinha, J. Heard Sri Rajeev Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Manish Dev, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that as per medical report, the prosecutrix is a major girl aged above 20 years. The present FIR has been lodged on the basis of application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. after six months though there is allegation of rape against the applicants who are real brothers but the same does not borne out from the medical report. The civil suit is also pending between the parties, the said fact is mentioned in para no.12 of the accompanying affidavit, on account of the said fact, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicants are stated to be 59 and 52 years of age respectively, the said fact is mentioned in para no.14 and 15 of the accompanying affidavit. The applicants are in jail since 3.2.2015. 3. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicants. 4. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. 5. Let the applicants Jamaluddin @ Jalaluddin and Salahuddin, involved in Case Crime No.103 of 2014, u/s 376(D) IPC, P.S. Saraimeer, district Azamgarh be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice: - (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law.