Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38290 of 2018 Applicant :- Shanib Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- S. Kamal Akhtar Khan,Mahesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mirza Ali Zulfaqar
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Shanib Ali in connection with Case Crime No. 94 of 2018 under Section 376, 313, 506 & 323 IPC, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Rampur.
Heard Sri S. Kamal Akhtar Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mirza Ali Zulfaqar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, learned AGA along with Sri Awaneesh Shukla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the state.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that it is a case where the parties were into a relationship and lived together, visiting different places together, and, during these escapades there were moments of cohabitation by consent. There is absolutely no hint or evidence of rape in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. through which the learned counsel for the applicant has taken the Court. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the prosecutrix has virtually used the word 'rape' for 'consensual sex' if read in the context in which that word has been employed. It is submitted that the prosecutrix is a matured woman of 31 years, whereas the applicant is a young man of 22-23 years.
Learned counsel for the complainant Sri Mirza Ali Zulfaqar has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the prosecutrix has been ditched after being promised marriage by the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits in a short rejoinder that a mere breach of promise to marry does not constitute rape.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, the circumstances of parties, the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and other evidence on record but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Shanib Ali involved in Case Crime No. 94 of 2018 under Section 376, 313, 506 & 323 IPC, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Rampur be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 12.10.2018 Deepak