Allowed

Nanhe@ Nanha@ Arif Khan v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Allahabad HC14 Feb 2022BAIL/4247/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot, J. allowed the bail application of Nanhe@ Nanha@ Arif Khan, convicted under Sections 376(2)(n), 342, 506 IPC. The court found merit in counsel's submissions regarding false implication, FIR delay, and lack of medical corroboration, factoring in jail overcrowding due to the pandemic.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence or witnesses.

Nanhe@ Nanha@ Arif Khan Vs State of U.P. through Secretary… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4247 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Nanhe@ Nanha@ Arif Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary Home At Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Shivesh Mishra,Vinod Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Shivesh Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Nafees Ahmad, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No.346 of 2021 at Police Station-Bhojipura, District-Bareilly under Sections 376(2)(n), 342, 506 IPC.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bareilly on 24.11.2021.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 25.09.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Shri Shivesh Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The delay of three months in lodgment of the F.I.R. is fatal to the prosecution case. The F.I.R. arises out of a money dispute between the husband and the victim. The husband of the victim and the applicant are

¶10

business partners. The F.I.R. is being leveraged in the disputed money claim made by the husband of the victim. The victim has contested several litigations. She was fully aware of the bail procedures. There was no occasion for her to call the applicant when her husband was there to assist her. The medical reports do not corroborate the allegations of rape or forceful 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.

¶11

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.

¶12

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

¶13

behalf of accused persons.

¶14

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.

¶15

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant-Nanhe@ Nanha@ Arif Khan be released on bail in Case Crime No.346 of 2021 at Police Station-Bhojipura, District-Bareilly under Sections 376(2)(n), 342, 506 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:-

¶17

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

¶18

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶19

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

(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

¶21

Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 14.2.2022 Ashish Tripathi

¶24

Digitally signed by ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI Date: 2022.02.15 16:55:14 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nanhe@ Nanha@ Arif Khan v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nanhe@ Nanha@ Arif Khan v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

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

Somvir Thakur and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chhotey Lal @ Sardar Vs State of U.P.

Pintu Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sidhnath Vs State of U.P.

Udayveer Sharma@ Gullu Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others