Saifurheman @ Rehman v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Single judge court rejected bail application filed by Saifurheman accused of gang rape under Section 376(D) IPC, holding that the prosecutrix supported FIR allegations despite age discrepancies and medical evidence gaps. Trial expedited within one year.
What did the court decide?
Application for enlargement on bail rejected; trial directed to be expedited within one year.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20355 of 2022
Applicant :- Saifurheman @ Rehman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Madan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
This bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in case Crime No. 349 of 2021, under Sections 376 (D), 506 IPC and Section 67 of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, Police Station Mundha Pandey, District Moradabad.
As per the FIR allegations, the informant had gone to the market to bye bangles where she met one Javed, who alongwith his friends promised to leave her at her house but instead of leaving her at her house, she was taken to the forest area where informant was subjected to gang rape by number of persons including the applicant.
The present bail application has been filed on the ground that there is a delay of more than two months in lodgement of FIR and that there exists contradictions in the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 Cr.P.C. vis-a-vis statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It is stated that the plea of rape is not supported by medical evidence.
Learned AGA on the other hand points out that the informant is 15 years of age as per the medical opinion and has been subjected to gang rape. It is also stated that the implication of the applicant is specific in statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the trial for offenses of rape and cheating.
Whether contradictions in the prosecutrix statements and delay in FIR lodgement justify granting bail.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
SAIFURHEMAN
Coram
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · May
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/20355/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court