Allowed

Fasahat v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Jul 2022BAIL/9246/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed by a single judge at Allahabad High Court. The applicant, charged under IPC 498A and other sections, argued false implication and lack of connection to the offence. The court found merit in submissions and granted bail without observing on merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

The bail application of the applicant was allowed; released on bail on personal bond and two sureties in like amount with specified conditions imposed.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9246 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Fasahat Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Tripathi,Manoj Kumar Tripathi,Shantanu Srivastava,Vinod Kumar Tirpathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 420 of 2021 at Police Station Noorpur District Bijnor under Sections 498A, 323, 342, 376, 504 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 29.11.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/FTC, Bijnor on 01.02.2022.

¶7

Shri Manoj Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is the brother-in-law of the victim. The F.I.R. arises out of a matrimonial dispute. The applicant has been falsely roped in along with other male members of the family only out of vindictiveness. The applicant did not torture the victim nor did he demand dowry. Further, the applicant did not act inappropriately or commit rape with the victim. Medical evidence to corroborate rape or forceful assault has not been produced by the

¶8

prosecution. Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence. Learned counsel for the applicant claims congruency in role and seeks parity in relief granted to the co-accused Naushad who has been enlarged on bail by the trial court by order dated 10.01.2022, in Bail Application No. 3184 of 2021. The other brother-in-law of the victim who were named in the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. were not chargesheeted during the investigation.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶10

Learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions.

¶11

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant- Fasahat be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case any averment made in the bail application or the submissions during the course of argument are found to be false or in case of breach of any of the above condition, the State/prosecution may move an application for cancellation of bail application.

¶19

Order Date :- 27.7.2022 Dhananjai

¶20

Digitally signed by DHANANJAI Date: 2022.07.28 11:24:23 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Fasahat v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fasahat 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

Pankaj Maurya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohit Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sandesh Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vinod Vs State of U.P.

Shivnath Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Vs State of U.P.