Hafiz Dilnawaj Vs State of U.P. and Another

¶1

Court No. - 1 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14293 of 2020 Applicant :- Hafiz Dilnawaj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

¶2

Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gaurav Pratap Singh, learned brief-holder for the State and perused the record.

¶3

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the victim as per certificate issued by the Principal of the institution is stated to be a major girl as her date of birth is 15.5.2001. The FIR was lodged by the father of the victim after three months of the incident. In the FIR there was only allegation of attempt to rape against the applicant. He further submits that the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. does not corroborate her medical report. The applicant is in jail since 28.11.2019.

¶4

Learned brief-holder for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C has levelled the allegation of rape against the applicant and co-accused Jumman. There is also another certificate issued by the Principal of another institution according to which the victim is a minor girl aged about 13 years.

¶5

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the submissions advanced and after going through the statement of the victim recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., I find that no good ground is made out for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant Hafiz Dilnawaj, involved in case crime no.238 of 2019, under Sections 323, 376 IPC and 8 POCSO Act, P.S. Shamshabad, district Farrukhabad is, accordingly, rejected.

¶7

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within the period of one year from the date of production of copy of this order before the trial court, if there is no legal impediment.

¶8

The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶9

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶10

Order Date :- 5.10.2020

¶11

Gaurav

¶12

Digitally signed by Justice Ramesh Sinha Date: 2020.10.05 18:59:37 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hafiz Dilnawaj v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hafiz Dilnawaj v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Kamla Pathak Vs State of U.P.

Km Srishti Kashyap Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mukul Dev Vs State of U.P.

Ramratan Vs State of U.P.

Wanted Vs State of U.P.

Kaushal Vs State of U.P.