Allowed

Murtaza v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2022BAIL/22395/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to the applicant in a rape case pending trial. The court relied on the statutory provisions and a Supreme Court precedent, noting the lack of prosecution evidence and the danger of false implication due to the alleged ulterior motive of pressuring the applicant into marriage.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount.

Murtaza Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22395 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Murtaza Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raja Sahani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Raja Sahani, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 442 of 2021, registered under Section 376 IPC, Police Station Campierganj, District Gorakhpur during pendency of the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The allegation against the applicant as alleged in the FIR is totally baseless. From the statement of the independent witness recorded during investigation, no case under section 376 IPC is made out. The allegation in the FIR is that on the pretext of marriage, the applicant committed rape. No medical examination has been done and the applicant has been falsely implicated to put pressure upon him to solemnize the marriage with the victim. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is next submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is also contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.01.2022.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the statement of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., medical report regarding age of the victim and evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused and the view laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant- Murtaza who is involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified :-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed. 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.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 4.7.2022 AU

¶17

Digitally signed by ADEEB UDDIN Date: 2022.07.05 10:10:23 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Murtaza v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murtaza 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandeep @ Sohanveer Vs State of U.P.

Balram Prajapti Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Gangawar Vs State of U.P.

Suaib Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Babar Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kanaujiya Vs State of U.P.