Allowed

Jamil v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2023BAIL/55201/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application for bail under Sections 376, 406, 452, 504, and 506 IPC, the Allahabad High Court allowed the bail application, relying on unrefuted arguments regarding the false nature of allegations and lack of medical evidence, without recording detailed observations on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55201 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Jamil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rayoof Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ravindra Prakash Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of the the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 674 of 2022 at Police Station- Khalilabad, District- Sant Kabir Nagar under Sections 376, 406, 452, 504, 506, IPC. The applicant is in jail since 07.11.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 22.11.2022.

¶7

The following arguments made by Sri Rayoof Ali, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Chandan Agarwal, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶8

(1). The delay in lodgment of the FIR is fatal to the prosecution case.

¶9

(2). The FIR was lodged only to deflect the attention from the conduct of the victim when her relationship with the applicant

¶10

got exposed.

¶11

(3). The applicant was a regular visitor to the house of the victim and there was no sign of force entry.

¶12

(4). The applicant did not capture any video of their intimate moments.

¶13

(5). The said allegations were falsely made only to aggravate the offence and cause imprisonment of the applicant.

¶14

(6). Medical evidence does not corroborate the prosecution case.

¶15

(7). The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶16

(8). The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶17

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant- Jamil be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on

¶19

furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶20

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

¶21

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶22

Order Date :- 22.2.2023 Pravin

¶23

Digitally signed by :- PRAVIN VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jamil v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jamil v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sadiq Ali Vs State of U.P.

Ishrat Ali Vs State of U.P.

Lakhan Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Vs State of U.P.

Mohit @ Ranvir Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Aashu @ Aas Mohammad Vs State of U.P.