The court granted bail on the grounds of prolonged detention without trial and lack of evidence indicating tampering, emphasizing the right to a fair trial.

JUDGMENT :

Gautam Chowdhary, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. This is the second bail application moved on behalf of applicant. His first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 27.03.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6979 of 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after rejection of first bail application, the trial has commenced. He has drawn attention of the Court to the order sheet of the trial court and submitted that incident is of the year 2021, charge has been framed against the applicant vide order dated 01.12.2022 and since then several times dates are being fixed regularly for evidence, but till date not a single prosecution witness has been examined and the trial court has also issued non bailable warrants against the prosecution witnesses several times, and lastly it was issued on 01.08.2024 but till date no one has turned up to adduce their evidence and the applicant is in jail since 16.06.20222 and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, thus, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.06.2022, having no criminal history.

4. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but has not disputed the facts asserted on behalf of applicant.

5. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

6. Let the applicant-Ramautar @ Rinku, involved in Case Crime No. 0551 of 2021, under Sections 4 98-A , 3 04-B, 120-B, 504, 506 I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act , Police Station Mangalpur, District Kanpur Dehat, be enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the complainant in any manner whatsoever.

(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

(v) The applicant 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