Criminal Miscellaneous Bail petition filed by Jauhara @ Mahak. The Hon'ble Court observed a delay of four months in lodging the F.I.R. and found the allegations improbable. The applicant was granted bail pending trial.
Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2042 of 2023 Applicant :- Jauhara @ Mahak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Heard Shri Abhishek Singh, Advocate holding brief of Shri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Varun Kumar Agnihotri, learned Holding Brief for the State.
The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 248 of 2022, under Sections 384, 394, 420, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Ganj, District Rampur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.
According to the F.I.R., on the allurement made by the applicant and other co-accused persons, applicant gave them Rs.3,000/- and thereafter, on 10.4.2022 when he arrived at the call of the applicant then they administered him some intoxicated drink and thereafter, some obscene video was prepared. Applicant and other co-accused persons also committed theft of Rs.8,000/- and threatened him if he will not give Rs.2 lacs then the obscene video will be viraled.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that entire allegations made against the applicant is totally false and baseless. The alleged obscene video is said to have been prepared on 10.4.2022 along with loot of Rs.8,000/- but in spite of that, F.I.R. of the present case was lodged on 6.8.2022 i.e. after about four months and informant failed to provide any plausible and cogent explanation in this regard. He further submits that actually informant under the pretext of marriage sexually exploited the applicant and when she refused to perform marriage with her then on 29.6.2022, applicant made a complaint to S.S.P. concerned but when nothing happened then on 5.8.2022, she made a complaint to D.I.G. concerned and when informant came to know about the fact, applicant is trying to lodge F.I.R. against him then he on 6.8.2022 lodged the F.I.R. of the present case. He further submits that on 11.8.2022 applicant also filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the informant, which is still pending. From the face value of the F.I.R. itself, entire allegation made against the applicant prima facie appears to be false and baseless and no reliance can be placed on such version. He next submits that informant is village Pradhan and he utilized his reputation and falsely implicated the applicant in the present case. Applicant is not having any criminal history
and in the present matter she is in jail since 7.10.2022.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the fact that F.I.R. of the present case was lodged after about 4 months of the incident and no explanation has been given by the informant in this regard.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
Indisputably, the F.I.R. of the present case was lodged after about 4 months of the incident and no explanation has been provided by the informant in this regard. Apart from that from the perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that story narrated in the F.I.R. appears to be quite improbable and it further appears that before lodgement of the F.I.R., applicant has made complaint against the informant that he sexually exploited her and applicant in the present is in jail since 7.10.2022. I am of the view, it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail.
In the light of discussions made above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Jauhara @ Mahak be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) 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 or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 1.2.2023 P.S.Parihar
Digitally signed by :- POORAN SINGH PARIHAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for release on bail given the delay in lodging the F.I.R. and its implausibility.
Whether the delay and improbability of the allegations render the case a fit one for bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jauhara @ Mahak
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
