Allowed

Suraj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2021BAIL/32844/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to an applicant accused of rape under Section 376 IPC. The court allowed the bail based on the applicant's cooperation with the investigation, lack of criminal history, and the fact that the trial had not yet commenced despite the submission of the chargesheet.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the applicant on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32844 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Suraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shweta Pandey,Pritam Das,Punita Pandey,Shri Prakash

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶6

Heard Mr Shri Prakash, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Suraj with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. -379 of 2021, under Section -376 I.P.C., Police Station -Gajraula, District -Amroha , during pendency of trial.

¶8

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, at present:

¶9

(i) the applicant is accused of offences under Section-376 I.P.C.;

¶10

(ii) against FIR lodged on 26.06.2021, the applicant is in confinement since 02.07.2021;

¶11

(iii) the applicant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest;

¶12

(iv) the applicant has no criminal history;

¶13

(v) chargesheet has already been submitted yet trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial;

¶14

(vi) on prima facie basis, only for purpose of grant of bail, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecution story is patently false. Relying on the recording of the CCTV camera of one Sumit Kumar, it is apparent that the alleged victim girl who is a married lady about twenty years of age and had been married for last four years had gone out of house of her own in the dead of the night. Thus, it has been submitted that the basic fact allegation of abduction is false. As to the allegation of rape, it has been submitted that there is no evidence with

¶15

respect to the same;

¶16

(vii) in any case, no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial.

¶17

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the final merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the 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:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressuring the witness, during the investigation or trial.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, the bail being granted shall be cancelled.

¶22

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶23

Order Date :- 1.12.2021 S.Chaurasia

¶24

Digitally signed by SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH Date: 2021.12.02 09:39:32 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Suraj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj 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

Narendra Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Chand @ Chand Vs State of U.P.

Radhe Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Vs State of U.P.

Renu Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shivam @ Shiva @ Bholu Vs State of U.P.