Allowed

Brijesh @ Suraj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Oct 2023BAIL/45365/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding offences of rape and criminal intimidation, the High Court granted bail to the applicant. Despite the serious nature of the charges against a close relative, bail was allowed due to overcrowding, lack of criminal history, and the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond and two sureties with conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence or witnesses and ensuring presence for key stages of trial.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:205469

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45365 of 2023 Applicant :- Brijesh @ Suraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

There are allegations against the applicant of committing the offences of rape and criminal intimidation of a major woman aged about 26 years after entering into her house. The victim is alleged to be aunt (chachi) of the applicant.

¶7

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and the victim have adjacent houses. They are closely related. The applicant is admittedly 17 years as per statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., when she is aged about 36 years. He has further submitted that it is a case of false implication of the applicant on account of property dispute between the parties who are closely related to each other. The applicant is in jail since 14.09.2023 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, Brijesh @ Suraj, involved in Case Crime No. 358 of 2023, under Sections- 376, 506, 452 IPC, Police StationMehnagar, District- Azamgarh, 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 :- 28.10.2023 / Rohit

¶19

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

Brijesh @ Suraj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brijesh @ 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

Narendra and Another Vs State of U.P.

Kusum Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.

Aakil Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Smt. Kheerpati Vs State of U.P.