Allowed

Rahul Gupta v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC11 Oct 2023BAIL/43340/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge bench allowed bail to Rahul Gupta in a trial under Sections 376, 506 IPC, and POCSO Act. Court cited overcrowding and Article 21, imposing strict conditions regarding non-interference with witnesses and court attendance.

What did the court decide?

Application for release on bail allowed subject to furnishing personal bond and two sureties with specific court attendance conditions.

Rahul Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:195857

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43340 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rahul Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Patel,Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Rahul Gupta, with a prayer to release him on bail in Session Trial No.841 of 2023, Case Crime No. 270 of 2023, under Sections 376, 506 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Paniyara, District- Maharajganj, during pendency of trial.

¶9

There are allegations against the applicant of commission of offences of rape, criminal intimidation and penetrative sexual assault.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as per the ossification test report, the age of the victim is 18 years. She is not minor. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has admitted that she knows the applicant well. He is brother of her Bhabhi. It appears that prior to her marriage, the victim had consenting relationship with the applicant. After the marriage of the victim, her objectionable photographs and video have been already sent by the applicant to her husband, but no such photographs and video have not been recovered by the Investigating Officer. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 2.8.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶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 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; 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.

¶13

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 :-

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 11.10.2023 Ruchi Agrahari

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul Gupta v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Gupta 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

Awanish Balmiki Vs State of U.P.

Pravesh Vs State of U.P.

Kamlesh Kumar Kharwar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shyam Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Baba @ Iqbal Khan Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Singh Vs State of U.P.