Surjeet Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 86

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22481 of 2022

Applicant :- Surjeet Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶5

As per the office report, the service upon O.P. No.2 is sufficient. However, none is present on behalf of the applicant.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No. 13 of 2021, u/s 363, 366, 376, 506, 323, 504 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Kotwali Kannauj, District Kannauj, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶8

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix was in love with the applicant and they got married with each other at Delhi and they were living happily as husband and wife. Thereafter, the parents of the victim started demanding money from the applicant and threatened him that they will implicate him in rape case. The victim, in her statements recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., has not corroborated the prosecution case as mentioned in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that the victim has refused for her medical examination. In her statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has stated that she is living with the applicant as his wife and they solemnized their marriage at New Delhi at their own will. It is further submitted that the victim accompanied the applicant at her own accord. The allegations levelled in first information report against the applicant are totally false and frivolous. It is further submitted that applicant has criminal history of one case which is explained in para-18 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Applicant is languishing in jail since 1.1.2022 and that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspect of the matter.

¶10

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶11

Let the applicant Surjeet in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶12

(1). The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence during the trial.

¶13

(2). The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶14

(3). The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶15

(4). 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 30.1.2023 Vandana

¶18

Digitally signed by :- VANDANA GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Arvind Sonkar Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Zaid Vs State of U.P.

Chandan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Jabbar Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Chaudhary @ Raghvendra @Patra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kumare Vs State of U.P.