Allowed

Sujeet Singh v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2022/1722/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, enlarged the applicant on bail in a case involving sexual offences. The court considered contradictions in the victim's statements and unsupported allegations of rape due to negative medical findings. After balancing the gravity of the offence against the lack of evidence and delay in trial, bail was granted subjec

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail by executing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence, ensuring presence at trial, and refraining from criminal act

Sujeet Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1722 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sujeet Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Qazi Sabihur Rahman,Gajendra Pratap Singh,Ravi Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ravi Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application has been filed seeking the release of the applicant on bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.320/2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Maal, District Lucknow.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to village rivalry and party bandi. No such incident, as alleged by the prosecution, took place. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case only with the intention to defame the image of the applicant and his entire family in the society.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the first information report was lodged on the pressure created by the family members of the victim. Initially the F.I.R. was lodged under Section 363, 366 I.P.C., thereafter, the statement of victim was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. in which she has leveled allegation of rape against the applicant whereas in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has leveled the allegation against three persons, namely, Pankaj Singh, Ramu Singh and the present applicant.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the entire prosecution story is set up with malicious intention, as there is vast contradiction in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and in the version of the first information report.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. regarding allegation of rape also got demolished after perusal of the medical report, as the doctor in his opinion has

¶11

opined that no live or dead spermatozoa seen nor there is any external or internal injury found on the person of the victim and the Urine pregnancy test is negative. Final opinion was also given that there is no sign of suggestive use of force.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that in absence of any medical report to support the allegation of rape, the entire allegations appear to be false. The radiological age of the victim as per doctor is 17 years and taking benefit of two years, she is major, thus, she knew her consequences very well.

¶13

Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been mentioned in para 21 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the accused does not have any criminal history and he is in jail since 06.08.2020 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the applicant has committed a heinous offence, as such, the bail application of the applicant be rejected.

¶15

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also in the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering the fact that there is vast contradiction in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and the allegation of rape got demolished after perusal of the medical report, as the doctor in his opinion has opined that no live or dead spermatozoa seen nor there is any external or internal injury found on the person of the victim and the Urine pregnancy test is negative and the age of the victim is 17 years, thus, taking benefit of two years, she is major and further considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶16

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant- Sujeet Singh involved in F.I.R./Case Crime No.320/2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Maal, District Lucknow be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-

¶18

(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶19

(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

(5) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial, in order to secure his presence, proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

(6) The applicant shall remain present, 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.

¶24

(7) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

¶25

(8) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶26

It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

¶27

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶28

Order Date :- 2.8.2022 Saurabh

¶29

Digitally signed by SAURABH VERMA Date: 2022.08.02 16:34:15 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sujeet Singh v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujeet Singh v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Taj Mohammad Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home, District Lucknow and 3 Ors.

Parshuram Vs State of U.P. through the Principal Secretary Home Deptt, Civil Secretarial U.P. Government Lucknow

Vijay Pratap @ Puttur Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Vs State of U.P. through,Prin. Secy. (Home), Lko

Nirdesh S/O Ram Naresh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Aman Kumar Maurya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.