Allowed

Mohammad Hamid v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC3 Oct 2023BAIL/3584/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding sexual assault allegations, the Allahabad High Court balanced the delay in FIR and lack of medical injuries against the applicant's clean record and absence of show-cause evidence against release, ultimately granting bail under standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions including appearance in court, no intimidation of witnesses, and prohibition on leaving India.

Mohammad Hamid Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189158

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3584 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Mohammad Hamid Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Gupta,Ashutosh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Pal

¶5

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. submits that instructions have been received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits.

¶7

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

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the allegations in the first information report it is alleged that the applicant and the another accused person have sexually assaulted the victim. The medical examination of the victim was conducted on 10.9.2022 in which no external or internal injury was found in the anal and perianal area. Although, the victim has stated that forcefully the sexual assault has been made on the victim. However, the medical report does not support the aforesaid story. The incident is alleged to have taken place on 3.9.2022, however, the first information report has been lodged on 10.9.2022 after delay. Blood stains were found in the undergarment of the victim and thereafter, the first information report has been lodged. There is no explanation for delay in lodging the first information report in the present case. The applicant has no criminal history. Applicant is languishing in jail since 11.9.2022 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Sri Sanjay Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the informant submits that the victim was sexually assaulted, as per the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. However, he does not dispute the fact that no injuries were found in the anal and perianal area of the victim. The first information report was lodged with delay on account of the fact that the father of the victim was living at another place and when he came, the first information report has been lodged.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute factual matrix of the case.

¶11

5A. Learned AGA has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would disentitle the applicant for Bail.

¶12

It is not the case of the State that the applicant has not cooperated in the investigation or proceedings before the trial court.

¶13

The principle that Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception has been well recognised by Apex Court more specifically on the touch stone of Article 21 of the Constitution. The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 (10) SCC 51 . Learned AGA has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the Applicant.

¶14

No material, facts or circumstances has been shown by learned AGA that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State.

¶16

Learned AGA for the State has not shown any material or circumstances that the accused/applicant is not entitled to bail in larger interests of the public or State.

¶17

10A. In the present case, it is to be seen that as per the first information report two accused persons including the applicant have sexually assaulted the victim. However, in the medical examination report no injuries have been found in the anal and perianal area. Although, the victim in his statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. made allegation of sexual assault against the applicant and the co-accused but the the same was not corroborated by the medical evidence. The nature of sexual assault alleged in the present case would have shown injuries to the victim. The applicant is in jail since 11.9.2022 and has no criminal history.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the 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.

¶19

Let the applicant Mohammad Hamid involved in Case Crime No.385 of 2022, under Sections 377, 506 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Kopaganj, District Mau 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 following conditions:-

¶20

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶21

ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶22

iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted and/or the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶23

iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶24

v. 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶25

vi. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶26

vii. In the event, the applicant changes his residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing.

¶27

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

¶28

Order Date :- 3.10.2023 Bhaskar

¶29

Digitally signed by :- BHASKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohammad Hamid v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Hamid 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

Sanjay Gautam Vs State of U.P.

Simmi Singh Alias Summi Alias Jaykaran Vs State of U.P.

Shahnabaz @ Majju Turki Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Prashant @ Lallu Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Bharat Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.