Allowed

Faisal Malik @ Suheb v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2023BAIL/29509/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Faisal Malik concerning added Section 376D IPC. The court held that since bail was previously granted considering victim statements, the applicant is entitled to release on a personal bond and sureties without expressing an opinion on case merits.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with standard conditions of appearance and non-interference.

Faisal Malik @ Suheb Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:148822

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29509 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Faisal Malik @ Suheb Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shiva Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Shiva Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA-I, for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.112 of 2023, under Section 376D IPC (added Section), Police Station Loni Border, District Ghaziabad during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has already been released on bail in the present case crime number vide order of this Court dated 24.5.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19778 of 2023 under Sections 363, 354, 354 Gha, 120B, 376 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 67 of Information Technology (Amendment) ACT, 2008 but charge sheet was submitted against the applicant in added Section 376D IPC and Section 5G/6 POCSO Act and bail of applicant in added Section 5G/6 POCSO Act has been allowed by court concerned itself but his bail application under Section 376D IPC has been dismissed.

¶9

He further submits that as after considering the entire evidence on record including the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. applicant was enlarged on bail by this Court, therefore, he may also be

¶10

enlarged on bail in added Section 376D IPC.

¶11

He further submits that applicant in the present matter is in jail since 12.3.2023.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

From the record it reflects that earlier on 24.5.2023 during investigation applicant was enlarged on bail by this Bench in the present matter but it appears that subsequently Section 376D IPC and Section 5G/6 POCSO Act were added and when applicant applied for bail in these added Sections before the court concerned then although his bail application uner Section 5G/6 POCSO Act was allowed but under Section 376D IPC his bail was dismissed by court concerned.

¶15

As from the order dated 24.5.2023 passed by this Court it appears that after considering the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. applicant was enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, therefore, in my view, applicant is also entitled to be released on bail in added Section 376D IPC.

¶16

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant- Faisal Malik @ Suheb be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and

¶19

two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.

¶23

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.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶25

Order Date :- 26.7.2023

¶26

SKM

¶27

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Faisal Malik @ Suheb v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Faisal Malik @ Suheb 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

Arif Ali Vs State of U.P.

Khursheed @ Raja Khan Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raju Vs State of U.P.

Kalawati Vs State of Up

Ajay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.