Allowed

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2022BAIL/1936/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant, Rahul, charged under Section 376D IPC. The court found merit in the submission that the victim was a consenting adult who did not resist, and noted the accused has no prior criminal record. Bail was allowed on personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond and two sureties with standard conditions against tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1936 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶4

Heard Shri Satendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Nafees Ahmad, learned AGA for the State.

¶5

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No.451 of 2021 at Police Station-Shikohabad, District-Firozabad under Section 376D IPC.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Firozabad on 01.11.2021. The applicant is in jail since 13.09.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶7

Shri Satendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the prosecution case, the victim was forcibly taken away on a motorcycle by the applicant and the coaccused-Bhola in a public view from public place. However, it is noteworthy that the victim did not raise an alarm nor did she resist her abductors. The victim is a major and was a consenting party. The F.I.R. has been lodged at the behest of her family

¶8

members only to deflect attention from her own conduct. The medical report does not corroborate rape or any forcible assault. Apart from the instant case the applicant does not have any criminal history. Lastly it is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond, and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶9

Learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. He, however, does not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶10

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶11

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. In the light of the preceding discussion and without

¶12

making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant-Rahul be released on bail in Case Crime No.451 of 2021 at Police StationShikohabad, District-Firozabad under Section 376D IPC, on his 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

(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.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶18

Order Date :- 7.2.2022 Ashish Tripathi

¶19

Digitally signed by ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI Date: 2022.02.08 14:09:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul 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

Rajesh Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P.

Manish Sethiya Vs State of U.P.

Ram Dulare Bind and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Firoz Vs State of U.P and 4 Others

Aslam Vs State of U.P.

Guddu Vs State of U.P.and Another