Allowed

Shahrukh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2023BAIL/37833/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant accused of gang rape and extortion, emphasizing the right to speedy trial under Article 21, police investigation delays, and jail overcrowding. Bail was granted on personal and surety bonds with strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail released on personal bond and two sureties each with conditions regarding evidence tampering, court appearance, and trial conduct; directed for speedy trial within one year.

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:172750

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37833 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Shahrukh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- A.Z.Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd. Aslam

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Mohd. Aslam, learned counsel for informant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Shahrukh , with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 185 of 2023, under Sections 376D, 377, 386 and 506 IPC, Police Station Gangoh, District- Saharanpur during pendency of trial.

¶8

There is allegation against the applicant of committing the offence of gang rape, unnatural offence, extortion by putting the victim in fear of death and threatening against two named coaccused and one unnamed accused.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has admitted befriending the co-accused, Sahir. She has claimed that she is married and having two children. Thereafter, she also became friend with the applicant and co-accused, Danish and admitted talking to all the accused persons on phone. Thereafter, she alleged that she was taken to the place where all the accused persons and unknown accused committing the offence of rape on pointing out of knife. It was also alleged that video of the alleged offence was made. Extortion of money is alleged but there is no witness of the same. Thereafter, she informed her husband and lodged the FIR. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that no evidence of recovery of any video was found by the Investigating Officer. The victim is a married woman and has falsely implicated the applicant and all the other accused persons in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 03.07.2023. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near

¶10

future.

¶11

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

The court below is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year.

¶21

Order Date :- 28.8.2023 Abhishek

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shahrukh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahrukh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharampal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Sabittra Devi @ Savitri Devi Vs State of U.P.

Gangesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rohit Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Satish Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Santoshi Devi Vs State of U.P.