Allowed

Naim v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2023BAIL/3834/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application filed by Naim in a criminal trial involving stalking and alleged rape. Despite serious allegations, the victim refused medical examination, citing enmity with the accused's family. The Court granted bail citing the fundamental right to speedy trial, overcrowding in jails, and the non-completion of investigation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to various conditions including presence in court on fixed dates.

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

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3834 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Naim Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Naim, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 614 of 2022, under Sections 323,376,452,506,354-D IPC Police Station Kairana, District- Shamli, during pendency of trial.

¶7

There is allegation of stalking, beating,threatening after entering the house of the victim.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it is a case of false implication.Victim is aged about 22years.She is a married women. She alleged that while she went to her parents house four months ago applicant met her and made her some incriminating photographs .Thereafter she alleged that applicant entered into the house of the victim and committed rape. However the victim has refused her medical examination. In her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. has admitted that there was enmity with her family and family of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 15.11.2022 and has no criminal history.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided

¶10

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 recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials 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

¶11

Let the applicant 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

That 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 ofÏcer;

¶16

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶17

The applicant shall remain present, in person,

¶18

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 13.2.2023 Atul kr. sri.

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Naim v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naim 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivam Tamrkar Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh @ Dhunmun and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Gaur Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunil Kumar Goswami Vs State of U.P. and Another

Atahar @ Athar Vs State of U.P.

Shivam Tripathi Vs State of U.P.