Allowed

Ravindra Singh v. State of Up

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2021BAIL/45304/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court considered a bail application filed by Ravindra Singh in a case involving rape, cheating, and cyber offences. Convincing arguments were presented regarding false implication and alteration of statements. The court found the bail case made out without expressing an opinion on merits and allowed the application with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties on terms to not tamper with evidence, intimidate witnesses, and not influence the complainant.

Ravindra Singh Vs State of Up — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45304 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ravindra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Adesh Kumar Dixit,Ved Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Wahid Jamal

¶4

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the first informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 292 of 2021, under Sections 376, 420 IPC & 67 Information Technology Act 2008, P.S. Gandhi Park, District Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It was stated that in FIR, it was alleged that applicant is physically exploiting victim since last some days, whereas, in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., prosecutrix has stated that applicant is physically exploiting her since last four years and in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has stated that about about 5 years back, applicant has committed rape upon her. It was stated that prosecutrix has materially changed her version changed her version at every step and her version is thoroughly doubtful. It was submitted that prosecutrix is a 39 years old lady and that her allegations are false and vague. It was submitted that in fact applicant is brother-in-law of prosecutrix and he has executed a sale-deed of a plot in favour of her real sister-in-law and sale-deed of one plot was executed by him in the name of his wife and as applicant has refused to

¶8

give plot to prosecutrix, she has lodged this false case. It has further been submitted that allegations that applicant has sent video or photographs of prosecutrix to one Lalit or to her brother is false and that no such video or photograph has been seized. It was submitted that criminal history of one case under Section 386 IPC was shown against applicant but the applicant has already been acquitted in that case. It has further been argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.07.2021 and that in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that there are allegations against applicant that he has committed rape upon prosecutrix and that he was physically exploiting her since long and that he has extorted Rs. 4 lacs from her. It was submitted that applicant has sent the video of prosecutrix to Lalit, who has sent the same to brother of prosecutrix.

¶10

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegations, period of custody and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that a case for bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Ravindra Singh involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶12

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶13

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution

¶14

witnesses.

¶15

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

The applicant will not try to contact, threat or otherwise influence the complainant or any of the witness of the case.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶18

Order Date :- 23.11.2021 Neeraj

¶19

Digitally signed by RAJBEER SINGH Date: 2021.11.24 14:23:29 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravindra Singh v. State of Up

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Singh v. State of Up

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

Mukesh Pasi Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Narayan Vs State of U.P.

Prakashi Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra @ China Vs State of U.P.

Manish Thakur Vs State of U.P

Arshad Vs State of U.P.