Allowed

Nihal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2022BAIL/54554/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 376(2)(n), 504, and 506 IPC, the court allowed the release of the applicant, Nihal, on a personal bond and two sureties, noting his lack of criminal history, no likelihood of fleeing, and the nature of the allegations based on the victim's statement.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54554 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Nihal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhaskar Bhadra 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. 307 of 2022, under Sections 376(2)(n), 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Qilla, District Bareilly, during pendency of trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that 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 as per the allegations in the FIR, it is alleged that applicant used to make lascivious talks with the victim and for the last five months, has been extending threats and hurling abuses to her. It is further alleged that by blackmailing her, he had made physical relations with her. Today on 27.09.2022, her husband apprehended them together from Hotel Sahgal.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 CrPC, in which, she has stated that applicant used to visit her house for repairing sofa and thereafter, he started chatting with her on mobile phone and under the pretext of getting facial of her sister, had called her at his house and clicked her some objectionable photographs and thereafter, repeatedly used to call her in Sahgal Hotel and made physical relations with her, however, he did not delete her objectionable photographs and insisted her to marry him and on refusal, extended threats to unravel her objectionable photographs to her husband.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that looking to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 CrPC, it appears that victim is a consenting party and made consensual physical relations with the applicant, however, when she was apprehended along

¶11

with applicant in the hotel by her husband, she has instituted present criminal case against the applicant with malicious intention.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that victim is a married adult lady, aged about 24 years and is having two children and is matured enough to understand consequence of her act.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant is in jail since 28.09.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit. The charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses, as such, he may be released on bail.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶15

Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that victim is a married adult lady, aged about 24 years and is having two children and is matured enough to understand consequence of her act.

¶16

The victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC has stated that applicant used to visit her house for repairing sofa and thereafter, he started chatting with her on mobile phone and under the pretext of getting facial of her sister, had called her at his house and clicked her some objectionable photographs and thereafter, used to call her in Sahgal Hotel and repeatedly made physical relations with her, however, he did not delete her objectionable photographs and insisted her to marry him and on refusal, extended threats to unravel her objectionable photographs to her husband.

¶17

Looking to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 CrPC, it appears that victim is a consenting party and made consensual physical relations with the applicant, however, when she was apprehended along with applicant in the hotel by her husband, she has instituted present criminal case against the applicant with malicious intention.

¶18

Furthermore, the applicant is in jail since 28.09.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit. The charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

¶19

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶20

Let the applicant Nihal be released on bail in the aforesaid case 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:-

¶21

The applicant shall continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶22

The applicant shall not tamper with the witnesses.

¶23

The applicant shall not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶27

Order Date :- 1.12.2022 Nadim

¶28

Digitally signed by NADIM ALAM Date: 2022.12.01 17:16:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nihal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nihal 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

Prabhat Saini Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Suryabhan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Shrawan Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Buddhsen Vs State of U.P.

Dileep Kumar Bhartiya Vs State of U.P.

Vipin @ Mukhiya Vs State of U.P.