Allowed

Salman v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2023BAIL/12519/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court, Allahabad Bench, allowed the bail application of Salman, charged with offences under IPC 363, 366, 376(2)(n) and POCSO Act, fixing conditions for bail grant and subsequent trial conduct.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties subject to specific conditions including attendance and non-tampering.

Salman Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:138847

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12519 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Salman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ehtesham Afsar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

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

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim is the real sister-in-law of the applicant. Learned counsel further argued that the victim is major as is evident from the perusal of page no.58 of the paper book. Learned counsel further argued that the victim in her statement recoded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that she has gone with the applicant out of her own free will and consent on the pretext of visiting Fun Park at Bareilly but she was taken to Delhi and thereafter to Himachal and the applicant has committed wrong with her. He further submits that the applicant had solemnised love marriage with his wife and some dispute had arose between the applicant and his wife, who had threatened the applicant to implicate in a false case as such, which culminated in the instant prosecution. He next submits that the applicant is victimised of false accusation at the behest of his wife. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 07.07.2022, having no criminal history.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant haveopposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by

¶9

contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶10

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Let applicant Salman involved in Case Crime No.185 of 2022 under Sections 363, 366, 376 (2) N of I.P.C., and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Deoraniya, District Bareilly, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., 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 I.P.C.

¶16

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.

¶17

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶18

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with law.

¶19

The bail application is allowed.

¶20

Order Date :- 13.7.2023 S.Ali

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Salman v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salman v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Rohit Vs State of U.P.

Kajim @ Alfazal Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Vs State of U.P.

Gullu Alias Gulab Singh Vs State of U.P.

Imran Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Kumar Vs State of U.P.