Allowed

Taju Alias Chand v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Jul 2019BAIL/23708/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 23708 of 2019, this Court allowed bail to the applicant accused of rape, emphasising family ties and lack of probative value in prosecution evidence while relying on the co-accused's prior bail.

What did the court decide?

Relief of bail granted on personal bond and two reliable sureties of the same amount to the satisfaction of the C.J.M./Magistrate.

Taju Alias Chand Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23708 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Taju Alias Chand Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been moved by the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 445 of 2018, under Sections 376D, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Phase III, District-Gautambudh Nagar.

¶7

As per prosecution version, 2/3-11-2017 in the night at 12 'O' clock, applicant and co-accused Sonu and Rizwan entered in the residence of prosecutrix on the pretext of demanding ladder and committed rape on her. Prosecutrix had sent several letters to the President, Prime Minister, Home Minister with assertion of occurrence and making complain against police personnel. First information report was lodged after four months of the occurrence on 22.3.2018. 22.3.2018.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant and co-accused Sonu and Rizwan are real brother. It is not probable for real brothers to enter into residence of the prosecutrix and commit rape on her. There was some property dispute between the parties. Accordingly, false first information report has been lodged against the applicant. In statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., prosecutrix has admitted that the applicant and other co-accused were threatening the prosecutrix and saying that she neither could sell her residential house nor she could reside in it. Accordingly, due to enmity, false allegation has been made against the applicant and other co-accused. Medical report does not support the prosecution version. Coaccused Rizwan has already been enlarged on bail by the order dated 31.5.2019 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc., Bail Application No. 31299 of 2018 (Rizwan Vs. State of U.P.). Applicant is languishing in jail since 23.4.2018 and he has no criminal antecedent.

¶9

Learned A.G.A., has opposed the prayer for bail. Prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., stated that the

¶10

applicant and other co-accused were threatening the prosecutrix not to sell her house.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find it a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Let the applicant Taju Alias Chand , 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 C.J.M./Magistrate, concerned.

¶12

Application stands allowed .

¶13

Order Date :- 10.7.2019 Jaswant

Taju Alias Chand v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Taju Alias Chand 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

Amit Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra Sharma @ Akhil Vs State of U.P.

Naushad Ahmad Vs State of U.P and Another

Arvind Vs State of U.P.

Mansoor @ Badela Vs State of U.P.