Allowed

Abid v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 May 2022BAIL/18282/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge order granted bail to the applicant challenging Section 376, 377, 364, and 120B IPC. The court found a prima facie case for bail since the victim is a consenting party aged 24. The applicant was released on personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties each subject to specified conditions.

Abid Vs State of U.P. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18282 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Abid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Rajeev Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Prashant Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.86 of 2022, under Section 376, 377, 364, 120B IPC, Police Station Nakhasa, District Sambhal with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., she is aged about 24 years. The victim has stated in her statement that she is having love affairs with applicant. He has further submitted that the victim has visited Mathura, Jaipur, Hathras with the applicant and stayed with him in different hotels and she has also clicked several photos with the applicant at all these places and during this period, she has not raised any alarm, hence, the victim is a consenting party. The applicant is in jail since 24.02.2022 and in case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not controvert the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the period of detention of the applicant, considering all other attending facts and circumstances of the case particularly seeing the fact that the victim is a consenting party aged about 24 years, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.

¶10

Let the applicant- Abid , involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy

¶11

sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions :

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶13

(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 IPC.

¶14

(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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶16

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

Order Date :- 26.5.2022 Ajeet

¶20

Digitally signed by AJEET KUMAR PATEL Date: 2022.05.27 16:33:09 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abid v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abid v. State of U.P.

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

Sonu Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Aman Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ajay @ Gulli Vs State of U.P.

Nirmala Vs State of U.P through Its Secretary Home

Soni Alias Radha Vs State of U.P.

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P.