Allowed

Israil v. state of u.p. thru prin.secy. home lucknow

Allahabad HC26 May 2022/1200/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application, the Court considered the applicant's request for release in a rape case involving inconsistent prosecutrix statements. Granting bail based on the Father's critical illness and lack of apprehension of absconding, the Court imposed conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court.

Israil Vs state of u.p. thru prin.secy. home lucknow — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1200 of 2022

¶2

Applicant :- Israil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Nath Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Satyendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rupendra Kumar Singh, learned State Counsel for the State.

¶5

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is languishing in jail since 27.07.2021 in Case Crime No.288 of 2021, under Sections 452, 376, 506 & 406/34 I.P.C., Police Station-Gauriganj, District-Amethi.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

¶7

The attention of this Court has been drawn towards the impugned First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) which has been lodged by the prosecutrix against the present applicant making allegation of rape and the allegation regarding Sections 452, 420, 506 & 406 I.P.C..

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the prosecutrix is 40 years old aged married lady having four children. As per her own version, her husband is at Dubai for the last three years. Further, the present applicant has not only committed rape with the prosecutrix but has threatened for dire consequences and taken Rs.90,000/- from her which was sent by her husband from Dubai.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has improved the story by submitting that the present applicant had made her video of the incident. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has again improved the story by submitting that from physical relation of the prosecutrix with the present applicant she has become pregnant and got herself aborted.

¶10

Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that

¶11

the story of the prosecutrix is not consistent as she is a married lady of 40 years whereas the present applicant is 25 years of young man. The entire prosecution story is based on false facts.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has also drawn attention of this Court towards the supplementary affidavit dated 20.05.2022 wherein he has enclosed the medical papers of the applicant's father to show that his father is suffering from Cancer of advance stage and there is no one in the family to look after his father, therefore, if he is released on bail, he may bring his father to appropriate medical hospital for his better treatment. There is no previous criminal history of any kind whatsoever against the present applicant. The charge-sheet has been filed in this case, therefore, there is no apprehension of absconding the present applicant or tampering with the evidence if he is released on bail.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has undertaken on behalf of the present applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings.

¶14

On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶15

Considering the fact that the prosecution story is not consistent as it varies from the F.I.R. to the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., as the charge-sheet has been filed and his father is a serious patient of Cancer and as per learned counsel for the applicant there is no one in the family to look after him properly, perusing the material available on record, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶16

Let the applicant-Israil, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-

¶17

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of

¶18

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.

¶19

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(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. is issued and the applicant fail 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.

¶22

(v) The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶23

Order Date :- 26.5.2022 [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Suresh/

¶24

Digitally signed by SURESH CHANDRA Date: 2022.05.28 14:41:03 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Israil v. state of u.p. thru prin.secy. home lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Israil v. state of u.p. thru prin.secy. home lucknow

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

Chandra Bhal @ Bablu Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Tinku Alias Manoj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. of Secy. Home

Akeel (Third Bail Application) Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home Department, Government of U.P., Lucknow

Kamal Vs State of U.P.

Anand Tripathi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Mayoor Ahuja (Second Anticipatory Bail) Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.