Allowed

Gautam v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2018BAIL/6613/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted to applicant Gautam in a rape case (S.T. 139 of 2017) pending since filing. Despite pending non-cognizable report regarding illicit relations, bail allowed upon personal bond and sureties subject to standard conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence and witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Enlarged the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Gautam Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6613 of 2018 Applicant :- Gautam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶4

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Gautam in S.T. No. 139 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No.497 of 2017, under Sections 376 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Robertsganj, DistrictSonbhadra with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶5

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the victim is a grown up married lady aged about 25 years. As she was having illicit relations with the applicant, her husband has lodged an N.C.R. under Section 493 Cr.P.C. against the applicant, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-1 to the supplementary affidavit wherein it is alleged that the prosecurix had illicit relations with Gautam, the applicant. Subsequently, relations between the victim and her husband became cordial, then the F.I.R. under Section 376 I.P.C. has been lodged against the applicant by the prosecutrix with the allegation that the applicant had raped her. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 01.11.2017, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail.

¶6

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶7

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.

¶8

Let applicant-Gautam be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-

¶9

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

¶10

2.The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

Order Date :- 28.8.2018

¶14

MN/-

Gautam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gautam 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

Ranjeet Singh Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Parmar Vs State of U.P.

Faeem @ Acche Babu Vs State of U.P.

Doodhnath Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Hari Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Aman Kumar Tripathi @ Raja Vs State of U.P. and Another