Allowed

Rahul Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2023BAIL/46769/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court granted bail to the applicant in a bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC. The applicant was accused of sexual assault and threats under IPC Sections 376 and 506. The court found the victim was a major and noted the absence of convincing evidence against the applicant.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:210893

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46769 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rahul Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Janardan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Janardan Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Rahul Yadav , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 254 of 2023, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Rani Ki Sarai, District Azamgarh.

¶8

The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 05.08.2023 by the victim herself against the applicant alleging therein that she is aged about 20 years and the applicant on a false promise to marry since last six months is sexually assaulting her. On her request to marry her, he has refused for it and even threatened her.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that on the own showing of the victim she is a major girl. It is argued that the relationship was a consensual relationship on some discussion of marriage between the parties but the same could not materialize and then the present first information report has been lodged. It is argued that the medical examination does not support the prosecution case. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 16 of the affidavit and is in jail since 10.08.2023.

¶10

Per contra , learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim in the first information report has disclosed her age as 20 years and as such she is a major. There was some discussion of marriage between the victim and the applicant but the same could not materialize, hence, the present first information report has been lodged.

¶12

Looking to 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, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Rahul Yadav , be released on bail in the aforesaid case

¶14

crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶21

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 and send the applicant to prison.

¶22

The bail application is allowed .

¶23

Order Date :- 3.11.2023 AS Rathore

¶24

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Yadav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ghanshyam @ Shiva Vs State of U.P.

Shyamveer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Vs State of U.P.

Banti Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rizwan Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Kesarwani Vs State of U.P.