Allowed

Mohammad Arif v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Feb 2022BAIL/45519/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Mohammad Arif, who was accused of kidnapping under IPC sections 363 and 366. The court noted the victim was major and the incident likely occurred out of free will as per investigation findings. Bail was granted subject to personal bond and local sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties of equal amount, subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45519 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mohammad Arif Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan Singh,Anurag Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant Shri Nagendra Bahadur Singh, Shri S.S. Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 135 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 506 and 504 I.P.C, Police Station Dakshin Tola, District Mau.

¶7

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that on 03-08-2021 an F.I.R. no. 0135 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 506 and 504 I.P.C, Police Station Dakshin Tola, District Mau has been lodged by the informant alleging that on 28-072021 at about 2:40 A.M. the applicant and his family members have enticed away the informant's minor daughter.

¶8

The applicant has filed a supplementary affidavit annexing therewith the medical examination report of the alleged victim of the offence. The doctor has recorded the statement of the victim who stated that she knows the applicant for the past five years. She went to see him in the lane in front of her house several times whenever he used to come for smoking cigarette. On 28-07-2021 she made a phone call to the applicant and asked him to come along with some clothes. They went by car to Kanpur and from there they went to Jhansi and thereafter to Hyderabad. From there they came to Dullapur and there they contracted 'Nikah'.

¶9

The medical examination of the victim records hymen intact and no abnormality has been detected.

¶10

In her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. also the applicant stated the same thing and she categorically stated that the applicant did not commit any misdeed with her. Upon coming to know through a you tube video that her parents had lodged a case falsely implicating the applicant and his family members of the charge of kidnapping her, she came back.

¶11

It is next contended that the applicant has no criminal history

¶12

and he is languishing in jail since 10-08-2021 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶13

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted on the basis of the instruction that after investigation all the other accused persons have been exonerated of all the charges and Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. have been expunged against the accused also and he has been charged for committing the offence under Section 363 and 366 I.P.C. Upon radiological examination during investigation the alleged victim has been found to be major. It has also come out during investigation that from examination of a CCTV footage it was observed that the accused was carrying a bag and was walking and behind him the victim was also walking carrying a bag.

¶14

In the light of the aforesaid facts the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the alleged victim being major and was in a love-affair with the applicant and she had gone away with him out of her own free-will and the applicant has been falsely implicated by the father of the alleged victim.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, I am of view that the applicant is entitled for bail. The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant Mohd. Arif 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:-

¶17

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶18

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶19

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 17.2.2022

¶22

pks

¶23

Digitally signed by PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.02.18 11:05:03 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohammad Arif v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Arif 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tayyaf @ Mohammad Tayyab and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kafeel Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home. Lko and Another

Mahfooj Alam and others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and another

Ajay Vs State of U.P.

Mahesh Vs State of U.P.

Kaptan Singh Vs State of U.P.