Allowed

Jahangir Khan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC15 Dec 2023BAIL/46492/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to Jahangir Khan, a rape applicant, noting the victim specifically alleged rape against a co-accused in the Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement despite initial allegations against all accused. The court considered the discrepancy in statements and absence of evidence tampering.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted upon furnishing personal bond and two heavy local sureties subject to conditions of attendance, non-tampering, and no adjournments.

Jahangir Khan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:237919

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46492 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jahangir Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- M J Akhtar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vimal Kumar Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Heard Shri V. M. Zaidi, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri M. J. Akhtar, the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State as well as Shri Vimal Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that though applicant is named in the F.I.R. along with other two named accused and one unknown person with the allegation that all the accused persons committed rape of the victim and though the victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has made allegation of rape against all the accused persons but in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has specifically made allegation of rape against the co-accused, Kayamuddin. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that thus specific allegation of rape is against the co-accused, Kayamuddin and the role of applicant is different from the co-accused, Kayamuddin. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that there is a delay of 14 days in lodging of the F.I.R. without any plausible explanation. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that though in the medical examination of the victim the concerned doctor found her hymen ruptured and she was found to be below 18 years of age in her medical examination, but the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has specifically made allegation of rape against the co-accused, Kayamuddin, therefore, this medical evidence does not relate to the case of the applicant, therefore, applicant has falsely been implicated in the case. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that criminal history of three cases of applicant has been explained in para-17 of the affidavit accompanying to the bail application. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the

¶8

applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 25.09.2023.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that it is a case of gang rape and the victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has made specific allegation against all the accused including the applicant, therefore, innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage and he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶10

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering that victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has made specific allegation against the co-accused, Kayamuddin, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Let applicant- Jahangir Khan , involved in Case Crime No. 442 of 2023, under Sections 376D, 365, 342, 506 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Kaptanganj, District Kushinagar, be enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence

¶15

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

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶18

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with law.

¶19

The bail application is allowed.

¶20

Order Date :- 15.12.2023 Mustaqeem.

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jahangir Khan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jahangir Khan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaipal Vs State of U.P.

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Lal Ji Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Vs State of U.P.

Vidhu Mahesh Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and Another