Allowed

Babbu @ Vijay Bahadur Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Jun 2021BAIL/22056/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed bail to the accused in a Criminal Chance case involving sections 376, 354-A, and others IPC. The court observed material contradictions in the victim's statements and noted the absence of rape allegations in the FIR, following the notice of the pandemic-related lockdown.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on filing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions including non-tampering with evidence and additional verification requirements.

Babbu @ Vijay Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22056 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Babbu @ Vijay Bahadur Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Yadav,Ashish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Babbu @ Vijay Bahadur Singh, who is involved in Case Crime No. 67 of 2021, under Section 376, 354-A, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Sumerpur, District- Hamirpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case; that the incident is alleged to have taken place on 15.2.2021 information whereof was given by the victim by dialing No. 112, on which police jeep arrived at the place of occurrence. The victim narrated the incident before the police who went to the applicant's house and picked him up. The accused abused the victim and threatened her before the police. A written F. I. R. was lodged thereafter on 26.02.2021. In the alleged FIR, there is no allegation of rape. Hence, the essential ingredient which constitutes the offence u/s 376 IPC is conspicuous by its absence in the present case. The victim who is a 40 years' old lady in her statement under Section 164 Cr. P. C. which was recorded on 4.3.2021, for the first time made allegations of rape against the applicant. Moreover, there is material contradictions in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr. P. C. It is lastly contended that the accused applicant is languishing in jail since 04.03.2021 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial and thus, the applicant is entitled for indulgence.

¶8

Learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without touching the merits of the case, in my opinion, the accused applicant is entitled for bail.

¶10

Let the above mentioned applicant involved in aforesaid crime 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, shall cooperate in the investigation or trial and will not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶12

In case of breach of any of the conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant

¶13

and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶14

However, if due to Covid-19 pandemic, the Sub-ordinate Court is under lockdown, 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.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

It is made clear that in the event the Sub-ordinate Court is functional as usual then the normal procedure/ mode of filing bail bonds and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned will be adopted.

¶18

Order Date :- 14.6.2021 HR

¶19

Digitally signed by Justice Umesh Kumar Date: 2021.06.15 10:24:01 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Babbu @ Vijay Bahadur Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babbu @ Vijay Bahadur Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raghavendra @ Rajuraja Vs State of U.P. and Anothers

Rameshwar Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Rinku Pasi Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Alias Deepak Malik Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Poonam Vs State of U.P.

Anil Yadav Vs State of U.P.