Allowed

Nadeem v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC28 Sept 2021CRLA/1753/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed the criminal appeal against the rejection of a bail application under Sections 342, 376 IPC and 3(2)(Va) SC/ST Act. The bench observed the lack of a proper test identification parade and absence of injuries on the victim. The appeal was allowed, the bail order granted, and specific conditions were imposed.

What did the court decide?

The appellant Nadeem was released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties and adhering to strict conditions regarding attendance in court and no delay tactics.

Nadeem Vs State of U.P.and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1753 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Nadeem Respondent :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mahendra Pratap Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mahendra Pratap, learne counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

As it is borne out from the order sheet that despite of the service upon opposite party no.2, no one has turned up to defend her case.

¶7

With the aid and help of learned AGA, the Court is proposing to decide the present appeal, which is targeted against the order dated 09.03.2021 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gautam Budh Nagar rejecting the bail application no. 1204 of 2021 in case crime no. 0241 of 2020, under Sections 342, 376 IPC and Section 3(2)(Va) SC/ST Act, P.s. Knowledge Park, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶8

Contention raised by the counsel that the FIR was registered against two unknown persons by the victim herself on 05.08.2021 for the incident said to have been taken place on 04.08.2021 around 2300 hours under Section 376, 342 IPC and Section 3(2)(Va) SC/ST Act with the allegation that she was ravished by two miscreants while she was going by Auto Scooter where both of them has after over powering her brutally and ravished her on gun point. The victim in her 164 Cr.P.C. statement has candidly submitted that she was not known the name and face of the appellant. There is no proper test identification parade was ever conducted so as to enable the victim to identify the assailants. In 164 Cr.P.C. statement, the way and manner she has said to have been identified the assailant is amusing one. On the top of it, there are allegation of two persons who have brutally committed excess over her and cross the limits of decency but thee allegations are categorically denied in the medical report. There is no external or internal injury over her person. The appellant is languishing in jail since 05.08.2020.

¶9

Learned AGA has vehementally opposed the bail application by making a mention that there is consistent stand of the victim, in the FIR as well as in her 164 Cr.P.C. statement but there is no satisfactorily reply to the fact that there was no proper test identification parade conducted in front of the victim so as to pin point the real culprit. The date and time of the incident is of dead hours of night about 11.00 in the night in a secluded/outskirt of district Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶10

The submission made by learned counsel for the appellant, prima facie, is quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, taking into account the manner and mode in which the appellant has been summoned and the period of detention already undergone, and also without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the

¶11

appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶12

Let the appellant-Nadeem, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(i) THE APPELLANT WOULD FULLY COOPERATE IN THE CONCLUSION OF TRIAL WITHIN ONE YEAR AND ANY TEMPERING OR WILLING TACTICS ON THE PART OF THE APPELLANT TO DELAY THE TRIAL WOULD WARRANT THE AUTOMATIC CANCELLATION OF BAIL.

¶14

(ii) THE APPELLANT 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.

¶15

(iii) THE APPELLANT 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.

¶16

(iv) IN CASE, THE APPELLANT MISUSE 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 APPELLANT 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.

¶17

(v) THE APPELLANT 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 APPELLANT 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.

¶18

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the appellant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.

¶19

Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated order dated 09.03.2021 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gautam Budh Nagar, is hereby set aside.

¶20

Order Date :- 28.9.2021 Abhishek Sri.

Nadeem v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nadeem v. State of U.P.and Another

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

Ajay Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sammo Khatun and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Bilal Vs State of U.P and Another

Sahil Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Titu @ Dheerendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satyaveer Vs State of U.P. and Another