Allowed

Suraj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Nov 2023BAIL/43860/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant in a bail application involving charges of rape and criminal intimidation. The court acknowledged jail overcrowding and the right to speedy trial, allowing bail while imposing strict conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:223486

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43860 of 2023 Applicant :- Suraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sushil Kumar Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Pavan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶6

There are allegations against the applicant of committing the offences of rape and criminal intimidation after entering into the house of the victim who is related as aunt ( chachi ) of the applicant.

¶7

Counsel for the applicant submits that FIR is delayed about four months. The victim and the applicant are closely related and were having consensual relationship. Since they were seen by some woman of the house in compromising position, FIR was lodged belatedly. Thereafter, the victim had admitted that her husband has turned her out of the house. The applicant alleges false implication in this case. He is in jail since 08.08.2023 and has no criminal history to his credit

¶8

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶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 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., 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.

¶10

Let the applicant, Suraj, involved in Case Crime No. 186 of 2023, under Sections- 376, 452, 506 IPC, Police Station- Chapar, District- Muzaffar Nagar, 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.

¶11

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

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails 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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 24.11.2023 Rohit

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Suraj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj 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

Aas Mohammad Vs State of U.P.

Preeti Vs State of U.P.

Aalam Vs State of U.P.

Shakeel Vs State of U.P.

Naresh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Sakshi Vs State of U.P.