IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Gautam Chowdhary, J.
Khushi Ram – Appellant
Vs.
State Of Up And 3 Others – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19402 of 2024
Decided On : 11-02-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 376 - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(2)(V) - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Bail application - Second bail application allowed based on progress of trial and contradictions in victim's statements - Applicant has been incarcerated since 23.12.2021 and has no criminal history. (Paras 3, 5, 6)
(B) Bail - Conditions imposed - Applicant to not tamper with evidence, attend court regularly, and not seek adjournments unnecessarily - Breach of conditions may lead to cancellation of bail. (Paras 6, 7)
Facts of the case:
The applicant's first bail application was rejected, and the trial commenced with five out of fifteen prosecution witnesses deposed. The victim's statements showed contradictions regarding the identity of the assailant.
Findings of Court:
The court found insufficient evidence indicating the possibility of tampering with evidence and allowed bail.
Issues: The main issues included the credibility of the victim's statements and the applicant's lengthy pre-trial detention.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's continued detention was not justified given the trial's progress and the evidence presented.
Result: Bail application allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Gautam Chowdhary, J.
1. Heard Shri Abhay Raj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Darwari Lal, learned counsel for the informant 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 19.07.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11836 of 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after rejection of first bail application, the trial has commenced. Learned counsel further submits that charges were framed on 05.04.2022 and out of 15 prosecution witness only five prosecution witnesses have deposed their evidence in trial, i.e., P.W.1-the victim, P.W.2-mother of the victim, P.W.3-Chandra Pal (cousin of complainant), P.W.4- H.C.P. Veer Pal and the first informant as P.W.5 and it appears that some more time would elapse in conclusion of trial. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that though the victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has clearly stated that on the date of incident when she went out of her house for throwing water the applicant came there and caught her from behind, thereafter, he took her in jungle where he committed her rape, but in the trial the victim in her cross-examination has specifically stated that she had not seen who caught her from behind, which statement has been filed as Annexure-7 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Thus, learned counsel for the applicant further submits that there are material contradictions in between the deposition of the victim before the trial court as well as in the statements of victim recorded earlier under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., thus, it is argued that there is bleak chance that prosecution may prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and the applicant may be convicted. 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. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 23.12.2021, having no criminal history and has already undergone a substantial period of incarceration, therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail sympathetically.
4. Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but they could not dispute 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-Khushi Ram, involved in Case Crime No. 390 of 2021, under Section 376 I.P.C. read with Section 3(2)(V) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 4 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Sirauli, District Bareilly, 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 app
The court granted bail due to contradictions in the victim's statements and the applicant's lengthy pre-trial detention, emphasizing the need for fair trial rights.
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.
The judgment emphasizes the need to balance the presumption of innocence with the rights of the victim and accused, and highlights the accountability of complainants in criminal trials.
The principle of 'Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty' supports bail as a rule, emphasizing the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Point of law: Applicant-accused is a student and he is languishing in jail, having no criminal history, and that in case the applicant-accused is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of b....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.