Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1902 (ALL)

Sallauddin v. State of U. P.

2022-12-02

RAHUL CHATURVEDI

body2022
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Sri Vikrant Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.294 of 2022, under Sections 452, 376 IPC, Police Station-Swar, District-Rampur is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. The applicant is in jail since 10.09.2022. 3. Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that the present case reflects the ugly fact of the society whereby the same prosecutrix "Ms.S" a major girl of 23 years has lodged the two successive FIRs in same year. She is prosecutrix of case crime no. 294 of 2022 (the present case) as well as yet another FIR as case crime no. 472 of 2022, P.S.Tada, District Rampur dated 21.09.2022 under Sections 376, 354 and 506 IPC in which the police has eventually submitted closure report. This court not be a merely a coincidence where in the same year, the major girl is lodging the FIR against same family members. Her conduct speaks volure about her own intention and plans, which needs no elaboration. 4. Now coming to the present case, the prosecutirx has lodged the present FIR against the applicant with the allegation that the applicant is a cousin brother with whom she has got engaged. It is alleged that in the FIR the applicant came to her prior to marriage and submits that since both of them are engaged and has asked sexual favour from her. After enjoying the time, the applicant has denied from the marriage. In 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. statement in almost in similar lines but unfortunately in the medical there is no a single injury over her private organs or external body and the doctor has completely ruled out any sexual excess by the applicant upon the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix is a major girl but there is no corroboration by the medical evidence, which cannot not be said that she was subject matter of rape. 5. Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. 6. The prosecutrix is a major girl but there is no corroboration by the medical evidence, which cannot not be said that she was subject matter of rape. 5. Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. 6. Taking into account the medical opinion of the doctor and the her successive conduct in lodging the various FIR on similar nature and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. 7. Let the applicant, Sallauddin, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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 APPLICANT/APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE/THEY SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES IS/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/APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER/THEIR COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIS/HER/THEIR UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC. (iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT/APPLICANTS FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIS/HER/THEIR, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC. (iv) THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS IS/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 HIS/HER/THEIR IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. (v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant/applicants to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-: 1. The applicant/applicants shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is/are restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored. 2. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. 3. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned. 4. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.