Allowed

Khalid v. State of U.P Thru, Secretary(Home) at

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2022BAIL/39064/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application filed by Khalid in a trial involving sexual offences. The court noted variations in the victim's statement and medical evidence but held that the applicant had made out a case for bail, granting release on personal bond and sureties subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two local sureties of like amount subject to conditions.

Khalid Vs State of U.P Thru, Secretary(Home) at — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39064 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Khalid Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru, Secretary(Home) At Counsel for Applicant :- Imran Mabood Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mukesh Joshi

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Counter Affiadavit and Rejoinder Affidavit filed today, be taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

¶6

Heard Mr. Imran Mabood Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Manish with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.113 of 2022, under Sections 376D, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Bhojpur, District-Moradabad, during pendency of trial.

¶8

As per the version of FIR lodged by victim herself on 14.04.2022 against four named accused persons including the applicant,. co-occused Laddan was known to the applicant since last two years qua some property, which belongs to Laddan and was purchased by the victim. Laddan used to visit the house of victim and on one day he entered the house of victim and committed rape upon her and recorded a video and threatened the victim to make it viral. There are other allegations against the applicant as well as co-accused persons.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. There are variations in the FIR as well as statement made by the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The story as narrated in the FIR is nothing but a bundle of lies as in the FIR, the victim has named four persons namely Laddan, Mohd. Shariq, Nawabul including the applicant, however, in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has changed her version by bringing two new names and removing the name of Mohd. Shariq and Nawabul. The medical report does not corroborate with the prosecution version. As per the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the allegation of commission of rape is upon Laddan, therefore, his role is distinguishable from that of applicant. The criminal history of applicant has been explained in paragraph 25 of the rejoinder

¶10

affidavit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 07.07.2022. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

¶11

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant-Khalid involved in 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:-

¶14

(i) 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 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.

¶15

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iv) 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 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

¶18

liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 3.12.2022 A. Pandey

¶21

Digitally signed by ANAND PANDEY Date: 2022.12.05 17:01:24 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Khalid v. State of U.P Thru, Secretary(Home) at

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khalid v. State of U.P Thru, Secretary(Home) at

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

Praveen Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pankaj Joshi Vs State of U.P.

Priyanshu Gaur @ Pisu Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Singh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Guddi Devi@ Asha Devi Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Bhardwaj Vs State of U.P.