Allowed

Sultan Ali v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2023BAIL/50574/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a serious criminal case involving abduction, rape, and POCSO offences. Relying on the lack of medical evidence and the victim's statement, and considering jail overcrowding and speedy trial rights under Article 21, the court ordered release on personal bond and two sureties with strict compliance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amounts, subject to strict conditions against tampering, seeking adjournments, and ensuring court attendance.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:229176

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50574 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sultan Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Sultan Ali, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 683 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC, 3/4 of POCSO Act, 3/5(1) of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station - Barhalganj, District- Gorakhpur, during pendency of trial.

¶8

There are allegations against the applicant of abduction of minor girl with intent to marry, commission of offence of rape and penetrative sexual assault apart from implication under Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, 3/5(1) of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as per ossification test report the age of victim is 17 years. She has neither made allegation of rape nor abduction against the applicant in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that given margin of one year on higher side, she can be considered to be major. The victim has refused her internal and medical examination. Therefore, there is no corroborative medical evidence against the applicant. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 22.09.2023.

¶10

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, she does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail, she will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

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 the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of

¶12

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. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 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 :-

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 4.12.2023 Abhishek

¶21

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

Sultan Ali v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sultan Ali 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

Nilesh Patel Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Ishwar Tyagi Vs State of U.P.

Deep Chandra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Faizan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sechan Lal Bind Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others