Allowed

Mohd. Akram v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Oct 2021BAIL/20329/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant charged with rape and other offenses under Section 376 and 506 IPC. The Court noted a four-day delay in FIR registration and lack of corroborative evidence, ordering release on a personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions to prevent bail evasion.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions on attendance and witness seizure.

Mohd. Akram Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20329 of 2021 Applicant :- Mohd. Akram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Shabbir,Mohd. Tasleem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶4

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.73 of 2021, under Section 452, 506, 376 IPC, Police Station-Nawabganj, DistrictBareilly is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶5

Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that after delay of four days, the present FIR was got registered by the victim herself against the applicant with the allegation that on the fateful day in the dead hours around 12 in the night, the applicant barged into the house and committed rape with her. The next contention is that at the time of incident, she was alone in the house and after getting this information, the applicant has exploited the situation and established physical relationship with her. She is the married woman and mother of two kids. Taking into account the totality of circumstances, it is highly unlikely that a person would barge into the house in the odd hours of the night and commit rape with her without any scream, alarm or resistance. The injury report of the lady do not corroborate the allegations of sexual assault upon her and it is highly risky to rely blindly upon the 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim without having any other supporting confidence generating documentary proof of the same. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.02.2021.

¶6

Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶8

Let the applicant, Mohd. Akram , who is involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶9

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES ARE PRESENT IN COURT. IN CASE OF DEFAULT OF THIS CONDITION, IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT IT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PASS ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶10

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶11

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶12

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. 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.

¶13

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶14

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

¶15

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶16

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶17

The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶18

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

¶19

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 27.10.2021

¶22

Sumit S

¶23

Digitally signed by RAHUL CHATURVEDI Date: 2021.10.28 10:29:38 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohd. Akram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Akram 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

Vikas Kumar @ Heeru Vs State of U.P.

Vicky Vs State of U.P.

Himmat Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Vs State of U.P.

Ramveer Singh @ Bhure Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Akil Jaha @ Akhatari Vs State of U.P.