The single-judge court allowed bail to Jamal Akhtar in a case involving rape and cheque-bounce charges, noting the parties' relationship and the prosecutrix's affidavit supporting withdrawal of prosecution.
Released on bail executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each subject to standard conditions including not tampering with evidence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43586 of 2018
Applicant :- Jamal Akhtar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Chaubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant Jamal Akhtar in Case Crime No.97 of 2018, under Sections 323, 376, IPC, and Section 66 IT Act, Police Station Laksa, District Varanasi.
Heard Sri Surendra Kumar Chaubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nitin Kesarwani, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant and the prosecutrix were into a relationship since the year 2016 when they became friends through Facebook posts, and, lateron, personal contact. Learned counsel has invited the attention of the Court to the FIR to show that this part of the applicant's case that the applicant and the prosecutrix became friends through Facebook and were became good personal friends, is clearly disclosed in the FIR. It is also hinted in the FIR, though after an allegation of rape, that the applicant when asked by the prosecutrix to marry her, beat her up and would torture her. In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., though there is an allegation of rape, but the fact is not denied that the applicant and the prosecutrix were friends since the month of March 2016, introduced to each other through Facebook, and, lateron personal friends. They would meet at different places and that though the allegation of rape and the shooting of an offending video is there, it is also mentioned in
the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., that the applicant refused to marry the prosecutrix, but after she lodged an FIR, he asked her that in case she would withdraw from prosecution, the applicant would marry her. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that through the length and breadth of the prosecution case, there is a clear picture of the prosecutrix bringing the present case in order to coerce the applicant, with whom she has been into a relationship for the past two years, to marry her under threat/pressure of the prosecution. Learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that now that the applicant has agreed to marry the prosecutrix, she has filed an affidavit in support of the present bail application, which is telltale.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the prosecution case is clearly established on a consistent note by the FIR and the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity of the offence, the nature of allegation, the evidence appearing in the case, the severity of punishment, and, in particular, the tenor of the allegations in the FIR and the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., where long time relationship/friendship between the parties is acknowledged and a pressure by the prosecutrix upon the applicant to marry her but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
The bail application, accordingly, stands allowed .
Let the applicant Jamal Akhtar in Case Crime No.97 of 2018, under Sections 323, 376, IPC, and Section 66 IT Act, Police Station Laksa, District Varanasi be released on bail on executing his 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 :- 16.11.2018 NSC
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving rape and cheque-bounce allegations.
Whether the relationship and circumstance of the prosecutrix requesting marriage influence bail decision.
Jamal Akhtar
Munir Malik
Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
