Allowed

Majahar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Nov 2022BAIL/48968/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving alleged sexual offences, observing that the victim was a major and the relationship appeared consensual, noting no evidence of illicit videos was recovered, and finding no flight risk.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to specific undertakings regarding court attendance and non-infringement of bail conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48968 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Majahar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Zakir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 890 of 2022, under Sections 376, 452, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station- Khurja Nagar, District- Bulandshahr.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the victim is a major girl aged about 32 years and as per the allegation made in the first information report, it is alleged that about 10 years back, the applicant- Majahar, who was staying in front of house of the victim had entered in his house and made physical relations with her and had clicked objectionable photographs and video and thereafter on the basis of threat perception of making the said objectionable photographs viral, continued to make physical relations with her and thereafter agreed to marry her and the victim continued to make physical relations with the applicant. Subsequently, when this fact was disclosed to her family members, the applicant on 23.5.2022 agreed to solemnise marriage with her, however subsequently, on 26.7.2022 when his brother and other family members visited the applicant's house for fixing the date of marriage, then they refused to solemnise marriage and assaulted them and extended death threats to them.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that infact the victim was in consensual relationship with the applicant for the last 10 years. The victim is about 32 years of age and is a major, however, when the applicant and his family members refused to solemnise marriage with her, the present first information report has been lodged with malicious intention just to drag them in criminal court.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant is in jail since 17.9.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the trial by all means. The charge sheet has also been submitted and there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses, as such, he be released on bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that victim is a major girl aged about 32 years and even according to the prosecution own case, she continued in consensual physical relationship with the applicant for the last about 10 years and has not made any complaint till they refused to solemnise her marriage with the applicant. Even during the course of investigation, no objectionable photographs and video as alleged by the victim has been recovered by the police.

¶12

Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the record, it is evident that the victim is a major girl aged about 32 years and even according to the prosecution own case, she has been in consensual physical relationship with the applicant for the last 10 years. Even during the course of investigation, no objectionable photographs and video as alleged by the victim has been recovered by the police. Furthermore, the applicant is in jail since 17.9.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit and there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering the evidence. In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, prima facie a case for bail is made out.

¶13

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

¶14

(1). 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

(2). 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 IPC.

¶16

(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial

¶17

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 IPC.

¶18

(4). 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 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 this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶20

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 24.11.2022 KU

¶24

Digitally signed by KALIM UDDIN SIDDIQUI Date: 2022.11.24 18:20:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Majahar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Majahar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dildar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shyamveer Vs State of U.P.

Vineet Vs State of U.P.

Junaid Vs State of U.P.

Amarpal Vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Nishad Vs State of U.P.