Allowed¶12

Waris v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2023BAIL/17638/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Siddharth, J.), order dated 18.7.2023, Neutral Citation 2023:AHC:142287; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 17638 of 2023, Waris v. State of U.P.; bail granted in Case Crime No. 49 of 2023, Sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 4 Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, P.S. Narain, District Banda; rape and threatening allegations; religion conversion; relied on Satendra Kumar Antil v. CBI, Article 21, jail overcrowding; conditions on bail; custody since 13.3.2023.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Waris to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the conditions in paragraphs 13 to 17. ¶12

Waris Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Waris should be released on bail in Case Crime No. 49 of 2023 (Sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 4, Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021), Police Station Narain, District Banda, during pendency of trial.

¶7

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Bail granted on finding force in the applicant's submissions, keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial, one-sided investigation by police ignoring the accused's case, the under-trial's fundamental right to speedy trial, the larger mandate of Article 21, the dictum in Satendra Kumar Antil, and 5-6 times overcrowding of jails by under-trials.

¶12

Key takeaways

Release on bail is subject to conditions: no tampering with evidence or threatening witnesses; undertaking not to seek adjournment when witnesses are present; personal presence on dates fixed including framing of charge and Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement, with exposure to proceedings under Section 229-A IPC, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. and Section 174-A IPC on default; breach of conditions is a ground for cancellation of bail.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail allowed. Waris, accused in Case Crime No. 49 of 2023 under Sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 4, Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 (P.S. Narain, District Banda), in custody since 13.3.2023 with no criminal history, ordered released on bail on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount. The court acted on the larger mandate of Article 21, the Apex Court dictum in Satendra Kumar Antil v. C.B.I. (S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided 11.7.2022), uncertainty of trial conclusion, alleged one-sided investigation and jail overcrowding, expressly without expressing any opinion on merits. Bail conditioned on non-tampering with evidence, undertakings against adjournments, presence at trial stages (with liability under Sections 229-A and 174-A IPC and Section 82 Cr.P.C. on default); breach is a ground for cancellation.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:142287

¶2

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17638 of 2023 Applicant :- Waris Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Javed Husain Khan,Mahadeo Singh Chandel,Pervez Husain Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ranjeet Singh

¶3

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶4

Compliance affidavit has been filed by learned AGA, which is taken on record.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Waris, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 49 of 2023, under Sections 376, 506 IPC and 4 Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, Police Station Narain, District- Banda, during pendency of trial.

¶8

There are allegations against the applicant of commission of offence of rape and threatening. He has been implicated under Section 4 Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the victim is aged about 30 years. She had admitted that she knew the applicant for last three years and was living with him as his wife. He is alleged to be compelling to change her religion and marry the applicant. He has demanded girls from her for the purpose of prostitution. He has submitted that the victim is major. She is already married woman and wife of someone and having two children. She was living with the applicant with consent. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 13.3.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to

¶12

speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

(ii) 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

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. 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

(iv) In case the applicant misuse 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

(v) 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

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

Order Date :- 18.7.2023 Ruchi Agrahari

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Waris v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Waris v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachin Gupta @ Sanjeev Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Madanlal @ Puttu Vs State of U.P.

Rinku @ Dileep Vs State of U.P.

Subba @ Rajendra Vs State of U.P.

Balwan Vs State of U.P.

Pappu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others