Allowed

Ishlam Mohammad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Mar 2019BAIL/11936/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was filed by Ishlam Mohammad for Case Crime No.240 of 2018 involving offences under IPC and POCSO. The court allowed the bail prayer, directing the applicant to furnish a bond and two sureties, subject to conditions preventing tampering with evidence and ensuring cooperation with the trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to conditions regarding non-tampering with evidence and cooperation with trial.

Ishlam Mohammad Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11936 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ishlam Mohammad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.S. Sachan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant - Ishlam Mohammad with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.240 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station - Khudaganj, District Shahjahanpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to malafide intention for the purpose of harassment and ulterior motive as well as village party bandi. As per version of the FIR, the victim was enticed away by the co-accused persons. Applicant is not named in the FIR. There is no allegation regarding commission of rape in the FIR and statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. against the applicant. Applicant name is came into light in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. wherein victim has stated that she went with present applicant with her own will and consent. There are variations in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. As per medical report no injury has been found on the body of victim. According to the supplementary medico-legal report her age is sixteen years. It is next contended that applicant has no criminal history and there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 27.07.2018. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but did not disputed the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and rival contention of learned counsel, without commenting upon the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the accused applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶10

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

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶13

During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities.

¶14

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶15

Order Date :- 28.3.2019 I.A.Siddiqui

Ishlam Mohammad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ishlam Mohammad 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

Arun Alias Annu Vs State of U.P.

Girish Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Mateejan Nisa @ Meteejan Vs State of U.P.

Akash Vs State of U.P.

Gulzari Vs State of U.P.

Umesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.