Allowed

Nawab v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Sept 2018BAIL/26360/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants bail to three applicants charged under IPC 376-D and POCSO in a complaint case. Noting the absence of material medical evidence for rape and the father's prior prosecution in a related incident, the court combined three bail applications and granted release subject to bonds and conditions to avoid tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties on conditions to appear and not tamper with evidence.

Nawab Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26360 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Nawab Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Bharti, Brij Kumar Saroj Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

And

¶5

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32703 of 2018

¶6

Applicant :- Ajeem Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brij Kumar Saroj, Sudhir Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶7

And

¶8

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32204 of 2018

¶9

Applicant :- Sameer Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, Rajiv Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh

¶10

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶11

Since all these bail applications arise out of the same complaint case, the same are being disposed of by this common order.

¶12

Heard Sri Sudhir Bharti & Sri Brij Kumar Saroj, learned counsels for the applicant appearing in bail application Nos. 26360 & 32703 of 2018 and Sri Rajiv Sisodia, learned counsel for the applicant appearing in bail application No. 32204 of 2018, Sri Bhuvenesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶13

The present bail applications have been filed by the applicants- Nawab, Ajeem & Sameer in Complaint Case No. 06 of 2015, under Sections 323, 452, 376-D I.P.C. and 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Sherkot, DistrictBijnor with the prayer to enlarge them on bail.

¶14

The submission of the learned counsels for the applicants are that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case by the first informant as a retaliation measure. In fact, the reality is that on 13.05.2015 the sister of the applicant Ajeem was raped in which the prosecutrix was also arrayed as an accused in the first information report lodged by Sri Ali Bahadur father of the applicant Ajeem on 13.05.2015 itself. It is argued that as a counter-blast to the aforesaid incident an application was moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 05.08.2015 regarding the alleged incident of rape on the victim by her father which is said to have taken place on 17.06.2015. The said application was treated as a complaint case in which the statement of the prosecutrix has been recorded. The doctor who examined the victim on 17.06.2015 has also been examined under Section

¶15

202 Cr.P.C. It is argued that barring certain injuries caused by blunt object on the victim there is no mention of any commission of rape or any sexual assault on the victim in the medical report even in the statement before the court the doctor has not stated about any sexual assault on the victim. Lastly, it is submitted that in the F.I.R. lodged by Ali Bahadur father of the applicant Ajeem charge-sheet has been submitted and mother of the victim and her other relatives are facing trial. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicants Nawab & Ajeem, who are languishing in jail since 04.05.2018 and the applicant Sameer who is languishing in jail since 28.05.2018, having no criminal history to their credit, deserves to be released on bail.

¶16

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that in the present case the victim is aged about 14 years and she was subjected to gang-rape by the applicants. Therefore, the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail. However, he could not dispute that there is no material or medical report on record to substantiate the factum of gang-rape on the victim and the cognizance against the applicants has been taken in a complaint case in which they have been summoned to face trial.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Let applicants- Nawab, Ajeem & Sameer be released on bail in the aforesaid complaint case number on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-

¶19

1.The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶20

2.The applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶21

3.The applicants shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶22

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicants.

¶23

Order Date :- 12.9.2018 Vikas/-

Nawab v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nawab v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sonu Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Pintoo Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhirendra @ Dhiru Singh Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mohd. Faheem Vs State of U.P.

Shoeb and Another Vs State of U.P.