Allowed

Rais Khan @ Rais Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC13 Aug 2018CRLA/1777/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal by Rais Khan against a bail rejection order. The High Court found a case for bail, allowing the appeal and releasing the appellant on personal bond and sureties subject to standard conditions regarding trial participation and no tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 15.03.2018 set aside. Appellant released on bail by personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions to appear in court and not tamper with evidence.

Rais Khan @ Rais Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1777 of 2018

¶3

Appellant :- Rais Khan @ Rais Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- S. Rashid,Deepak Singh Patel Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Jeet Bahadur Singh,Vinod Kumar Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri S. Rashid and Sri Deepak Singh Patel, learned counsels for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. However, no one has appeared on behalf of respondent no.2 to oppose the prayer for bail of the appellant in the instant appeal, even in the revised call.

¶6

This appeal has been filed against judgement and order dated 15.03.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Room No.10, Allahabad passed in Bail Application No. 942 of 2018 (Rais Khan vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 54 of 2016, under Sections 363, 366, 376D, 506 I.P.C., Section 3(1)(12) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and 3/4 of The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act,2012 P.S. Shankargarh, District Allahabad, by which bail plea of appellant has been rejected.

¶7

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that order of the learned court below rejecting bail application of applicant-appellant is bad in law. It is further submitted that the appellant is neither named in the F.I.R. nor in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It is further stated that allegation of rape was levelled against co-accused, Firoz Khan. After two months of the incident, due to enmity, the prosecutrix named the applicant in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has alleged that the appellant and co-accused, Mohd. Firoz Khan had committed gang-rape upon the prosecutrix. The co-accused, Mohd. Firoz Khan, who is the main accused has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.38136 of 2016 vide order dated 16.11.2016. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that learned court below has also failed to consider that appellant has no criminal history to his credit and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Thus the appellant, who is in jail since 08.12.2017, also deserves to be released on bail.

¶8

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail prayer and submitted that the appellant has criminal history of twelve cases, therefore, the appellant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

I have perused the criminal history of the appellant out of which most of the cases are under Cow Slaughter Act and Gooonda Act.

¶10

Having heard the submission of learned counsel of both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation against appellant and evidence in support of it and unlikelihood of conclusion of trial in near future, I find that a case for bail has been made out.

¶11

In the result, appeal is allowed. The judgement and order dated 15.03.2018

¶12

passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Room No.10, Allahabad is set aside.

¶13

Let appellant-applicant-Rais Khan @ Rais Ahmad, be released on bail in aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant-appellant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.

¶15

(ii) The applicant-appellant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

(iii) The applicant-appellant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶17

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶18

Order Date :- 13.8.2018

¶19

MN/-

Rais Khan @ Rais Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rais Khan @ Rais Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Imran Vs State of U.P.

Hari Kishan Vs Sate of U.P.

Naushad Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Vs State of U.P.

Vinod Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shankar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.