Allowed

Nabi Hussain S/O Habib v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Allahabad HC15 Dec 2022/7055/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge granted bail under Section 439 CrPC to Nabi Hussain, accused of rape, observing that the dispute arose from a failed betrothal and deciding it as a fit case for bail without commenting on the guilt.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two local sureties with strict conditions of attendance and conduct.

Nabi Hussain S/O Habib Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7055 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Nabi Hussain S/O Habib Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Pratap Singh,Mohd. Waris Farooqui,Shailendra Nath Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate and gone through the entire record.

¶6

By means of this application under Section 439 CrPC, the accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR No.093 of 2022, under Sections 376, 328, 385 and 506 IPC lodged at Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Balrmpur.

¶7

It is alleged that marriage of the prosecutrix got fixed with the accused-applicant; they started talking to each other over telephone. It is alleged that on the date of incident, the accusedapplicant came home of the prosecutrix with two bottles of Maaza drink; he gave one bottle to the prosecutrix and after consuming half of the bottle, the prosecutrix got dizzied and the accused-applicant committed rape on her. It is further said that the accused-applicant had filmed the act and on threat of making the video viral, he established physical relation with the prosecutrix for several times; the accused-applicant had been blackmailing the prosecutrix and took Rs.15,000/- from her.

¶8

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the prosecution story is completely concocted and false; marriage of the accused-applicant with the prosecutrix got fixed, but later on the same could not get materialized; to teach a lesson to the accused-applicant, a false FIR came to be registered. The accused-applicant is 22 years of age whereas the prosecutrix is 21 years of age.

¶9

Mr. Ranvijay Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate, has opposed the bail.

¶10

Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, particularly, that the marriage of the accused-applicant with prosecutrix got fixed, however, could not be materialized and without commenting upon merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail.

¶11

Let applicant- Nabi Hussain , accused of above-mentioned

¶12

FIR/crime number, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local and reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions, which are imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(i) the applicant(s) 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 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;

¶14

(ii). the applicant(s) 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;

¶15

(iii). in case, the applicant(s) misuse(s) the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant(s) fail(s) 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; and

¶16

(iv) the applicant(s) 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

[D.K. SINGH, J]

¶18

Order Date :- 15.12.2022 MVS/-

¶19

Digitally signed by MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN Date: 2022.12.15 18:55:12 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Nabi Hussain S/O Habib v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nabi Hussain S/O Habib v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

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

Subhash Lodh Vs State of U.P. through Principle Secretary Home, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow

Satyam Yadav S/O Moti Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home and 3 Others

Buin Urf Gudun Urf Arjun Kumar S/O Sadashiv Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Diwakar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Superintendnet of Police Central Bureau

Awadh Nishad S/O Bhagau Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ram Dulare Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow