Suleman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:46522

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7345 of 2023

Applicant :- Suleman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sheikh Mohammad Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This is second bail application filed by the applicant in F.I.R. No. 357 of 2021, under Section 326 IPC, Police Station Jarwal Road, District Bahraich with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that as per the prosecution case, on 29.12.2021, private part of the victim-Naim Ahmad was chopped by the applicant. Drawing the attention of the Court towards the birth certificate of the child of the victim dated 11th May, 2023 (Annexure 7 to the bail application), learned counsel for the applicant vehemently submits that, in case, such an incident had happened, as alleged in the F.I.R. as well as in the statement of the victim, it was not possible that the wife of the victim could conceive or give birth to the child, who born on 08.12.2022, thereby falsifying the impotency of the alleged victim. It is also submitted that till today, not even a single witness was examined. It is lastly submitted that in near future, there is no possibility of conclusion of trial and the applicant, who has no criminal antecedent, is in jail since 31.12.2021. In such circumstances, applicant is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the applicant will never misuse the liberty of bail and shall fully cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for grant of bail to

¶10

the applicant and submits that the role of the applicant has been defined by the victim as well as by other witnesses. However, he does not dispute to the birth certificate.

¶11

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of F.I.R., bail application as well as other relevant documents, including the birth certificate of the child of the victim along with the fact that till today, not even a single witness has been examined, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Application stands allowed.

¶13

Let applicant -Suleman be released on bail in F.I.R. No. 357 of 2021, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶15

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 or to any police ofÏce or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶17

(iv) 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.

¶18

(v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during

¶19

trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. may be issued and if 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.

¶20

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) 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 sufÏcient 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.

¶21

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶22

However, trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the case expeditiously without giving any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

¶23

Order Date :- 17.7.2023 VKS

¶24

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suleman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suleman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arif Mansoori and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Rakesh Yadav Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko

Saniya Bano Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrett. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Smt. Neha Srivastava Prop. N v System Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitendra Awasthi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ram Niwas and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Govt. of U.P., Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Another