Allowed

Ranjeet Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Aug 2018BAIL/6734/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving rape and blackmail allegations. The court imposed a personal bond with two sureties and conditions against tampering with evidence or pressuring witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions against tampering with evidence and pressuring witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 52 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6734 of 2018 Applicant :- Ranjeet Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pt. S.P. Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Akhilesh Kumar Ojha,Awadhesh Prasad

¶2

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Pt. S.P. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Akhilesh Kumar Ojha & Sri Awadhesh Prasad, Advocates appearing on behalf of the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶4

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.266 of 2017, under Sections 376, 452, 506, 384 IPC and 67 of I.T. Act, Police Station Erich, District Jhansi, with the prayer to release him on bail.

¶5

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the victim is a married lady aged about 28 years. The first information report was lodged after about 27 months of the incident of alleged rape. It is alleged in the first information report that one year before her marriage applicant had raped her. It is further alleged by her that the applicant had prepared video clipping and on the basis of which he used to blackmail and sexually assault her. It is argued that during investigation the video clip is alleged to have been recovered by the investigating officer, was sent from the Mobile of one Purshottam. Lastly it is contended that it appears that the victim was a consenting party. It is stated that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.10.2017 having no criminal antecedents.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. 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 made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶8

Let applicant Ranjeet Singh, 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; (2) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (3) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.

¶10

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the Courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant. Order Date :- 27.8.2018/Hasnain

Ranjeet Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shabbu Vs State of U.P.

Saddam Khan Vs State of U.P.

Gulshan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Parmar Vs State of U.P.

Faeem @ Acche Babu Vs State of U.P.

Birju Harijan Vs State of U.P.