Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Shadab vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 October, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33994 of 2021 Applicant :- Shadab Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun,Bipin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohammad Faisal Khan
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Mr. Bipin Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Mohammad Faisal Khan, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No.179 of 2021, under Sections 376, 452, 323, 504, 506, 325 I.P.C., Police Station Meerapur, District Muzaffarnagar, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
The contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant is that Yameen, father of the victim has lodged the first information report on 09.07.2021, under Sections 376, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. against the sole accused-applicant with allegations that in the mid hour of the night, around 3 in the morning, the applicant barged into the victim's house and committed rape with her. Thereafter, the applicant battered (Marpeet) the victim and fled away from the site. It is submitted that the victim is aged 19 years as per her medico legal report. The victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is explicit and needs no explanation. She seems to be in a consensual relationship because no unknown person would barge into the house in the mid hour of the night. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.07.2021.
Mr. Mohammad Faisal Khan, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail plea of the applicant and submit that the father of the victim as well as the victim have sustained injuries. But, it would not going to mitigate the that the applicant is not in a consensual relationship.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant, Shadab, who is involved in Case Crime No.179 of 2021, under Sections 376, 452, 323, 504, 506, 325 I.P.C., Police Station Meerapur, District Muzaffarnagar, 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 be verified.
(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT SHE 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.
(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT 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 FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) 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 THE TRIAL COURT 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 HER 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
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 to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:
1. The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is 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 a computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
3. The computer generated copy of this order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
4. The Court/Authority/Official concerned shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official Order Date :- 26.10.2021 Brijesh Maurya
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Shadab vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 October, 2021
Judges
  • Rahul Chaturvedi
Advocates
  • Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun Bipin Kumar