Allowed

Naim v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Apr 2023ABAIL/1570/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Naim in a criminal case involving Sections 493, 323, and 504 IPC. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the applicant was granted bail subject to various conditions including cooperation with police and prohibition of tampering or intimidation of witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with conditions including availability for police interrogation, no tampering with evidence, no foreign travel, and attendance at trial.

Naim Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1570 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Naim Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Firdos Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Firdos Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.312 of 2022, registered under Sections 493, 323, 504 I.P.C. at Police Station Atrauliya, District Azamgarh with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the informant/victim was divorced by her husband twelve years after her marriage. The applicant is stated to have entered into corporeal relationship with her on the pretext that he shall marry her and is stated to have taken a rental room, whereby he had kept her there. Later on, the applicant is stated to have refused to marry her and is stated to have married someone else instead. For some time, the applicant is stated to have given her some money for maintenance but later on had discontinued the said maintenance also. On being asked for the said amount of maintenance, the applicant is stated to have beaten her, thereby causing injury to her.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel has placed much reliance on the judgments of Apex Court passed in case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, reported in 2019 (9) SCC 608 and Ansaar Mohammad vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 886 , wherein it has been stated that entering into any kind of corporeal relationship with a person on the pretext of getting marriage cannot be termed as rape and has stated that as such no offence is

¶10

made out against the applicant.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the said promise to marry does not stand substantiated by the fact that the victim herself is a married women elsewhere about 25 years before the occurrence. Learned counsel has stated that the allegations are not of rape rather they are with respect to maintenance. Learned counsel has stated that the injuries sustained are simple in nature as it has been observed that she was complaining of pain on her eye and shoulder. There was no visible injury seen by the doctor examining. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit, except one case in which he is on bail as has been explained in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1" . The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶14

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Naim be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶16

(ii). that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any

¶17

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 officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶18

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶19

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶20

(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶21

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶23

[Krishan Pahal, J.]

¶24

Order Date :- 24.4.2023 Vikas

¶25

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Naim v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naim v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Nabab Khan Pathan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Salman and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sumant @ Sumant Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Ashok Pathak and 4 Others Vs State of U.P.

Shamshad @ Daniyar Vs State of U.P.

Smt Reena Vs State of U.P.