Allowed

Arshad Hussain @ Arshad Shairi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2022BAIL/10675/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application filed by the applicant in a case involving rape, extortion, and under POCSO Act. The court held the delay in FIR and inconsistencies in the victim's statement merit bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to specified conditions.

Arshad Hussain @ Arshad Shairi Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10675 of 2022 Applicant :- Arshad Hussain @ Arshad Shairi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Madhu Ranjan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶4

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 318 of 2021 at Police Station Kotwali, District Pilibhit under Sections 376, 384, 392, 506, IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act. The applicant is in jail since 09.11.2021.

¶5

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Pilibhit, on 29.01.2022. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the delay of four years in lodgment of the FIR is fatal to the prosecution case in the facts of this case. As per the prosecution case set out in the FIR the age of the victim is about 17 years. The date of birth of the victim is incorrectly depicted in the date of birth certificate as 17 years and half months. The victim is in fact a major. However no medical examination to determine the correct age as per duly established medical protocol was got done by expert doctors from a reputed institute as the same would falsify the prosecution case.

¶6

The victim has alleged that the applicant had been raping her over the years and had also captured

¶7

indecent videos. However no such videos have been recovered during the course of investigation from the applicant.

¶8

Delay in lodgment of the FIR is fatal to the prosecution case in the facts of this case.

¶9

The victim alleged that the applicant had also blackmailed her for money. As per the statement in the FIR she gave a sum of Rs. 1,17,025 which is at variance with the amount stated in the FIR. Moreover the victim is the daughter of a poor auto rickshaw driver. She was not in a position to arrange the amount. The investigation officer has noticed various inconsistencies in the statements of the victim. Material contradictions in the FIR, statements of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C discredit the prosecution case. No medical evidence to support any allegation of rape or forceful assault has been produced by the prosecution. The investigation officer has also recorded that the victim is not cooperating with the investigation, and has failed to disclose various relevant facts which are essential for appropriate investigation. Learned counsel for the applicant has explained the criminal history of the applicant and contends that the same has no bearing on the instant case.

¶10

Shri Rishi Chaddha, learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions

¶11

from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶12

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant- Arshad Hussain @ Arshad Shairi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶17

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the

¶20

prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶21

Order Date :- 11.7.2022 Pravin

¶22

Digitally signed by PRAVIN VERMA Date: 2022.07.12 17:40:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arshad Hussain @ Arshad Shairi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arshad Hussain @ Arshad Shairi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Chameli Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Kumar Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Gupta Vs State of Up.

Nitin Vs State of U.P.

Sonu @ Awdhesh Vs State of U.P.