Allowed

Sarfaraj and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2023BAIL/43139/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal bail application filed by Sarfaraj and Another in a case involving offences under IPC and POCSO Act. The High Court, hearing the application, opined that the applicants were entitled to bail without commenting on merits and granted bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants Sarfaraj and Shoyab were released on bail on personal bond and two sureties each on conditions not to tamper with evidence, pressurize witnesses, and to appear on all fixed dates.

Sarfaraj and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:229072

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43139 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sarfaraj And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Gurfan Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sumit Goyal

¶5

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 107 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366-A, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 16/17 POCSO Act, Police Station- Chilkana, District- Saharanpur, during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicants submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The F.I.R. has been lodged belatedly. The victim has denied to undergo medical examination. The victim was neither enticed by the applicant nor was she recovered with them. In her statement u/s 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has not supported the prosecution version and has stated that she loves applicant Shoyab. The applicants have no criminal, they are in jail since 14.08.2023, in case, they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Having regard to the submissions made but without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Let the applicants, Sarfaraj and Shoyab , involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

¶12

i. the applicants shall not temper with the prosecution evidence;

¶13

ii. the applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicants shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 4.12.2023 S.Verma

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sarfaraj and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarfaraj and Another 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amaan @ Landi Vs State of U.P.

Anmol Singh Vs State of U.P.

Rafeek Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Reeta Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mithlesh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Raju Kuraishi Vs State of U.P.