Allowed

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

Allahabad HC10 May 2023BAIL/3239/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the Allahabad High Court considered allegations of false implication and contradictions in victim statements. Relying on Supreme Court precedent regarding delay and evidence inconsistency, the court observed that the ingredients of the offense were absent and the prosecution faced internal contradictions. Consequently, the court found the applicant had made a case for bai

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond with two sureties and adherence to conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence and harassment.

Momin Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:105293

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3239 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Momin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Haya Rizvi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Mithilesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that statement of victim, informant and eyewitness Pintu have been recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and there is material contradiction in the statement of victim and informant. It is further submitted that eye witness Pintu has not supported the prosecution version in his statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that ingredients of offences are absent and entire prosecution story is based on false and frivolous allegations. It is further submitted that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has 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. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.11.2022 and he has no criminal history.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submits that prima facie offence against the accused applicant is made out and in case applicant is release on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail, but, he could not disputed the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused, looking to the delay in conclusion of trial, fact that eyewitness has not supported the prosecution version and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant Momin involved in Case Crime No. 296 of 2022, under Sections 377, 511 I.P.C. and section 5M/6 POCSO Act and section 3(2)V SC/ST Act, Police Station Garhmukteshwar , District Hapur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶11

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

¶12

(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.

¶13

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶14

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

¶15

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 and send the applicant to prison.

¶16

Order Date :- 10.5.2023

¶17

Bhanu

¶18

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Momin 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pravez Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Rana Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Shankuntla Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Tarun Vs State of U.P.

Sheetla Prasad Vs State of U.P. and Another