Allowed

Saurabh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Feb 2022BAIL/37336/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 37336 of 2021, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant, Saurabh, accused of rape and sexual harassment. The court noted contradictions in the victim's statements and lack of external injuries but cited public interest precedent to allow bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to conditions regarding witness tampering and trial attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37336 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Saurabh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Pal Singh,Toshiva Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Yogendra Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State through video conferencing and perused the material on record.

¶6

Sri Santosh Kumar, Mishra, Advocate submits that he has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the applicant in the registry but his name has not been shown in the list.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Saurabh under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 127 of 2021 for offence punishable under Sections 328, 354-Ka, 376, 511 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station- Rohta, District- Meerut, during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Brief facts of the present case are that the first information report dated 14.08.2021 has been lodged against the applicant and two other co-accused persons namely Ujjwal and Monu by first informant stating therein that applicant called the first informant on 13.08.2021 to met on 14.08.2021 at Rohta by-pass where two unknown person were also present there; applicant forcefully given her liquor and took her to the Gym of coaccused Ujjwal, where the applicant and co-accused Ujjwal drank liquor in a cold drink to the victim and applicant asked her to meet Monu who was the first informant's friend earlier and after meeting Monu, all the accused persons including the applicant tried to molest the first informant, which was opposed by the victim and anyhow victim called her friend who saved her.

¶9

During the course of investigation statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 14.08.2021; medical examination has been conducted on 14.08.2021 at 09:50 P.M. at CHC Rohtak; statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 17.08.2021 and no external injury has been found at the time of medical examination.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. No time of the incident has been mentioned in the first information report. It is further submitted that there is material contradiction between the allegation of the first informant as well as statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that there is no external injury has been found on the body of the victim. The applicant is arrested on 15.08.2021.

¶11

It is further submitted that co-accused Ujjwal has been granted bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 38512 of 2021 on 24.12.2021. He has next argued that the applicant has no previous criminal history and if the applicant is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

After considering the facts of the present case it prima facie appears that;

¶14

(a) No time of the incident has been mentioned in the first information report.

¶15

(b) There is material contradiction between the allegation of the first informant as well as statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It would not be appropriate to state the same at this stage.

¶16

¶17

It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with.

¶18

Taking into account the totality of facts and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of State of

¶19

Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., (2002) 3 SCC 598, Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 118 , the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed.

¶20

Let applicant, Saurabh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶21

(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶23

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

¶24

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶25

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶26

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

¶27

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that 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 in accordance with law.

¶28

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance of law after the

¶29

release of the applicant, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶30

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶31

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶32

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶33

Order Date :- 4.2.2022 Ishan

¶34

Digitally signed by ISHAN JAISWAL Date: 2022.02.08 11:33:11 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Saurabh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh 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

Harpal Vs State of U.P.

Shyamdei and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Ram Samujh Gaur And others Vs State of U.P. through its Principal Secretary (Home) Lucknow and another

Raju @ Rishipal @ Rishi Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Kumar@ Shibbo Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhishek Bajpai Vs State of U.P.