Allowed

Sanjay Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2022BAIL/55116/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application under Section 376 IPC. The applicant, a relative of the victim, argued he was falsely implicated despite a fixed marriage with another. The High Court, noting the nature of the offence but the supportive evidence submitted, allowed bail subject to strict conditions regarding court appearances and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions of presence and non-adverse interference.

Sanjay Singh Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55116 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sanjay Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Shishodia,Gyan Chandra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Jitendra Kumar Shishodia, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. A.K. Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Sanjay Singh with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 414 of 2022, under Sections 376 IPC, Police StationChandausi, District Sambhal, during pendency of trial.

¶8

As per the prosecution case, an FIR has been lodged by victim herself on 04.10.2022 at about 20:45 hours. The applicant is a distant relative of the victim. The applicant used to frequently visit her house being distant relative. Nearly three years ago good friendly relationship developed between applicant and victim as a result of that applicant and victim used to have regular conversation on telephone and meeting each other. Seeing the friendly relation between the two the family members decided to solemnize the marriage between the two. Three days ago, when the victim came to know that the marriage of applicant has been fixed with some other girl she tried to contact the applicant and was informed that his parents have fixed the marriage with some other girl as they are getting dowry.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Though the relations between the applicant and victim is friendly, there is no allegation in the first information report that the victim has been sexually exploited or forcefully physical relation has been established with the victim, therefore, no offence under the alleged section is made out against the applicant. As the applicant was selected as a Constable in R.P.F., therefore, pressure has been built up by the alleged victim for personal benefits. He further submits that the medical report of the victim did not support the prosecution version. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal history and

¶10

there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 05.10.2022. Accordingly, he requests for bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the crime is heinous in nature, however could not dispute the fact that the victim has not been sexually exploited.

¶12

Considering the nature of the offence, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by 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 .

¶13

Let the applicant 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:-

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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 applicants fail 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.

¶17

(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 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 :- 3.12.2022 Arti

¶20

Digitally signed by ARTI SHARMA Date: 2022.12.03 15:43:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanjay Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Singh 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

Praveen Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pankaj Joshi Vs State of U.P.

Priyanshu Gaur @ Pisu Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Guddi Devi@ Asha Devi Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Bhardwaj Vs State of U.P.

Khalid Vs State of U.P Thru, Secretary(Home) at