Shahrukh v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Criminal Misc. Bail Application rejected. Applicant Shahrukh sought bail in a rape case alleging false implication. Court rejected bail citing gravity of offence and specific allegations without expressing opinion on merits.
What did the court decide?
Bail application rejected; applicant not enlarged on bail.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56521 of 2022
Applicant :- Shahrukh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anwar Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Javed Khan,Ritesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Shahrukh for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.173 of 2022 under Sections 328, 376-D I.P.C., Police Station George Town, District Prayagraj.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident is alleged to have taken place on 07.05.2022 whereas, the F.I.R. has been lodged on 19.05.2022 without there being any plausible explanation of such an inordinate delay of 12 days in lodging of the F.I.R. He further submits that the victim and the applicant have good relations/friendship from the last three years, since they are of different religion, thus the victim initially made pressure upon the applicant to marry her, later on, victim made pressure upon the applicant to execute an agreement for live-in-relationship which was executed on 21.09.2021, thereafter she was making pressure upon the applicant to solemnise marriage which was refused, due to which, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel next argued that the victim was residing at
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in a case involving rape allegations given the delay in FIR and the nature of the charges.
Whether the allegations of false implication and consensual relations establish grounds for bail in a serious non-bailable offence.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Shahrukh
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Dr. Gautam Chowdhary
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · February
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/56521/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court