Dismissed

Nisar v. State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Civil Sectt U.P. Lko and Another

Allahabad HC14 Oct 2022/1612/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment deals with an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC filed in a gang rape case (Sections 376D, 504, 506 IPC). The court held that due to the serious nature of the allegations and the existence of prima facie evidence, it was not a fit case to grant bail, and the application was rejected.

What did the court decide?

The application for anticipatory bail was rejected.

Nisar Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Civil Sectt… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 29

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1612 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Nisar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Civil Sectt U.P. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Deo Raj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Aman Kumar Shrivastav

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Deo Raj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Dinesh Singh Rana, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Aman Kumar Shrivastav, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present second anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Nisar , under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 1052 of 2019 for offence punishable under Sections 376D, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station- Kotwali Sadar, District- Lakhimpur Kheri, during pendency of the trial after rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the applicant by Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C. Lakhimpur Kheri vide order dated 22.7.2022. First Anticipatory Bail Application of the applicant has been dismissed as withdrawn by this Court on 2.9.2022.

¶7

Brief facts of the present case are that the first information report dated 1.9.2019 has been lodged by the victim stating that on Friday night she was sleeping over the roof in the night at 1.00 a.m. She went to washroom. When she came out from the washroom, the applicant and other named co-accused persons caught hold her, took her on a bike forcibly and reached in the house of other co-accused persons where they committed gang rape with her.

¶8

After lodging of the first information report, medical examination of the victim was conducted on 2.9.2019. At the time of medical, clothes of the victim have been taken into possession.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant has not committed any offence. As per medical report, no external injury was found on the body of the victim. It is further submitted that the applicant

¶10

has no criminal history and he has not been convicted by any court in cognizable offence. The applicant has not been charge sheeted by the Investigating Officer and he has been summoned in an application under Section 319, Cr.P.C.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submit that the first information report has been lodged on 1.9.2019 at 17.15 hours and the medical examination was conducted on 2.9.2019. It is further submitted that the victim has stated in her statements as well as first information report with regard to gang rape committed by the applicant and other co-accused persons. The applicant has not given any reason to implicate falsely in the present case. The applicant has filed Criminal Revision against the order passed on application under Section 319, Cr.P.C. before this Court, which has been dismissed on merits.

¶12

It is settled position of law that the anticipatory bail being an extraordinary privilege should be granted only in exceptional cases. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied, where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely roped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature, therefore, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶14

The present anticipatory bail application is rejected.

¶15

Order Date :- 14.10.2022 T. Sinha

¶16

Digitally signed by TRIPTI SINHA Date: 2022.10.17 19:02:08 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Nisar v. State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Civil Sectt U.P. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nisar v. State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Civil Sectt U.P. Lko 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

Hasruddin Ansari @ Bauna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kaushlendra Alias Atul Vs State of U.P Secy. Home

Pradeep Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secretariat, Lko.

Ajay Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Anit Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nitin Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another