1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Firoz vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 February, 2019


Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7558 of 2019 Applicant :- Firoz Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ghandikota Sri Devi,J.
Vakalatnama filed by Sri Jitendra Singh, Advocate on behalf of the informant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant, and perused the record. Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant through his counsel is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; that according to the prosecution version, when the victim was alone in her house at about 10 hours ,the accused /applicant entered into the house of victim, caught hold and committed rape on her; that in the medical examination conducted by the doctor at D.D.V. Female Hospital, Moradabad no mark of external injury was found on the body surface and the private part'; that prosecutrix is major and matured girl and her radiological age has been determined as 20 years; that there are material contradictions in the statements of proseuctirx under Section 161 & 164 Cr. P.C. and they are also in contradiction with the averments made in FIR; that the averments made in the FIR are absolutely false, baseless and highly improbable; that the medical examination report does not support the prosecution case and commiting rape on her; that the charge sheet was submitted in the court and victim was examined as pw-1, in which she has not supported the prosecution case; that from the avermments made in FIR the prosecutrix appears to be consenting party; that the applicant has no criminal history; that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that the applicant is in custody since 05.09.2018.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Firoz be released on bail in Case Crime No.297 of 2018, under Sections 376 , 452 I.P.C. and section 3/4 POCSO (Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act 2012, P.S. Pakbara, District Moradabad on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 21.2.2019 T.S.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Firoz vs State Of U P


High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

21 February, 2019
  • Ghandikota Sri Devi
  • Santosh Kumar Tiwari