Allowed

Raja Kashyap v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Dec 2022BAIL/50225/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge Criminal Misc. Bail Application allowed. The court observed that the applicant made out a case for bail, considering the nature of the offence and circumstances, and ordered his release on a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding trial attendance.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50225 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Raja Kashyap Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Istyak Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Istyak Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Rakesh Soni, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Raja Kashyap with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.429 of 2022, under Sections 376, 323, 452, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Bilhaur, District-Kanpur (Outer), during pendency of trial.

¶7

As per prosecution version, the FIR has been lodged by the victim herself on 01.09.2022 at 15:10 hours for the incident dated 31.08.2022 alleging therein that while she was sleeping, the applicant came and forcefully committed rape upon her. On hearing her screams, the family members came, dialed 112 and the applicant was handed over to the police.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. From the statements before the doctor as well as under Section 161 Cr.P.C., it is clear that the victim and applicant were friendly with each other and when the parents caught the applicant when he came to meet the victim, the present FIR was lodged under pressure of her parents. He further submits that the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C., which was recorded on 12.09.2022 is under pressure of her parents. The fact that the victim has refused to get herself medically examined also supports the case that the victim is friendly with the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that when the victim denied to get herself medically examined, her family members created a scene forcing the doctors to medically examine her and the doctors had no option but to get an FIR lodged against the family members of the victim. The overall conduct goes to show the consensual relationship between applicant and victim and the pressure exerted by the family members of the victim to get such an FIR lodged to falsely implicate the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 13.09.2022. The applicant

¶9

does not have any previous criminal history. 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.

¶10

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.

¶11

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.

¶12

Let the applicant- Raja Kashyap 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:-

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 15.12.2022 Rahul.

¶20

Digitally signed by RAHUL GOSWAMI Date: 2022.12.19 13:26:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raja Kashyap v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja Kashyap 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

Maharam Vs State of U.P.

Akil Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Maya Rai Vs State of U.P.

Kalawati Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Sonkar Vs State of U.P.

Meraj Khan Vs State of U.P.