Allowed

Gyasuddin Ansari v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2020BAIL/40885/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge court granted bail to the applicant in a rape and POCSO case. The court noted the lack of corroborative statement and applied guidelines from a Supreme Court precedent to allow bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties of like amount, subject to conditions regarding tampering, cooperation, absconding, and attendance.

Gyasuddin Ansari Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40885 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Gyasuddin Ansari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anoop Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant- Gyasuddin Ansari with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.242 of 2020, registered under Sections 376, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Padrauna, District Kushinagar during pendency of the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to mala fide intention; the applicant is husband of the victim/informant; victim lodged the present F.I.R. through the application filed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.; in the F.I.R., the victim alleged two years back incident in which she was raped by the applicant thereafter compromise was made between the parties on 04.01.2019 and Nikah was solemnized with the applicant and victim was living as legally wedded wife but she further made allegation that the applicant had misbehaved and tortured her and demanded for Rs.2 lacs cash, car and gold ring. No demand of dowry has been made by the applicant nor by the applicant's family; victim was examined by Medical Officer and as per medical report there is no mark of external injury over the body and victim refused to undergo for internal examination. As per statement of victim recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., no allegation of rape has been leveled against the applicant; the statement made under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are not corroborating the version of F.I.R. as well as medical report; present F.I.R. has been lodged only to harass the applicant as the victim is not willing to live with the applicant; the applicant has no previous criminal history. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is next submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is also contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.08.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the statement of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., medical report regarding age of the victim and

¶10

evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused and the view laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant- Gyasuddin Ansari, who is involved in Case Crime No.242 of 2020, registered under Sections 376, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Padrauna, District Kushinagar, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified :-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 2.12.2020 Nitin Verma

Gyasuddin Ansari v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gyasuddin Ansari 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hradyansh (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Kanchan Sonkar (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saurabh Vs State of Up and Another

Asim Vs State of U.P.

Vikki @ Vikas Vs State of U.P.

Chandrapal Vs State of U.P.