The Allahabad High Court has allowed the bail application of Ajit Kumar, accused of kidnapping and raping a minor girl.
A Single Bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Ajit Kumar.
By means of the bail application the applicant, who is facing prosecution in connection with Case under Sections 363, 366, 323, 504, 506, 376-D IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, police station Soraon, district Prayagraj, is seeking his enlargement on bail during trial. The applicant has been in jail since 24.4.2022.
Contention raised by the counsel for the applicant is that on 31.3.2022 the father of the victim has lodged the FIR against the sole named accused Ajeet Kumar with the allegation that in the intervening night of 29.3.200 at about 11.00 in the night his daughter (17 years of age) was enticed away by the applicant and when he woke up than the informant found her daughter was not present in the room, and despite all the best efforts, her whereabouts could not be traced.
The girl was eventually recovered on 23.4.2022, thus, it is clear that she remained in the company of the applicant almost about a month without any objection, alarm or assistance from any other qua.
The Court noted, In the 161 CrPC statement, which was recorded on the date of recovery, she has clearly exposed that on 26.3.2022 she on her own gone out and join the company of the applicant and went to Pratapgarh, Varanasi and thereafter Phoolpur, where she has got married in a Naulakha temple and she clearly indicates that she does not want to remain in the company of her parents.
After three days of the recovery, her 164 statement was recorded, in which she somersaulted by 180 degree specifically under the influence of her parents, whereby she has attributed the allegation of kidnapping and rape upon the applicant and one Sachin.
There is no parallel between the 161 and 164 CrPC statements. She was put for the medical examination and except minor abrasions over the neck, shoulder, breast and lips, there is no other injury over the private organ.
There is a major shift in the change in the 161 and 164 CrPC statements, but the AGA is unable to explain that she remained in the company with the applicant about a month without any resistance and objection, which speaks ferociously about her ultimate object.
It appears, without making any comment upon the merit of the case, it seems that she is in the consensual relationship with the applicant.
The AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
“Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail,” the Court observed, while allowing the bail application.
“Let the applicant Ajit Kumar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties are verified.
(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. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence.
(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 CrPC 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 CrPC.
“If in the opinion of the trial court, the 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.
“In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail,” the order read.