Dismissed

Aadil v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 May 2023BAIL/56979/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal bail application rejected for alleged gang rape and posting of indecent videos of a minor on social media citing serious nature of charges.

What did the court decide?

Rejects bail application citing serious nature of charges of gang rape and spreading indecent videos of a minor on social media.

What the court decided

Aadil Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:102873

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56979 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Aadil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Kakkar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shyam Babu Vaish

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Gaurav Kakkar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shyam Babu Vaish, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Amit Kumar Shukla, learned Brief Holder, for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.102 of 2022, under Sections 376DA and 506 IPC, Section 5G/6 POCSO Act, 67 I.T.Act and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahr during pendency of the trial.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged on 18.2.2022 against the applicant and one another and against one unknown persons and according to the FIR, about 3 months before applicant and other co-accused persons after dragging the minor daughter of the informant aged about 12 years, committed rape with her and they also prepared videos of the same and about one month before also applicant committed rape with her and threatened her but in the meantime, applicant posted indecent videos of the victim on social media and thereafter on enquiry victim narrated entire story to the informant.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that entire allegation against the applicant is totally false and baseless and actually victim was having friendship with co-accused Anuj and

¶10

due to friendship with Anuj, applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He next submits that even FIR of the present case was lodged after 3 months and this fact clearly suggests that after cooking up false story, FIR of the present case was lodged.

¶11

He further submits that although there is allegation against the applicant that he posted indecent videos of the victim on social media but there is no such evidence on record and during investigation it was revealed that video was viraled by co-accused persons, namely, Sumit and Raja @ Yograj and both have been enlarged on bail even by the court concerned.

¶12

He further submits that even from the perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. it appears that she did not even mention the date of alleged rape and her medical report also completely belies the prosecution case as she did not sustain any injury in spite of the fact that she was minor hardly 12 years old girl.

¶13

He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 20.2.2022, i.e., for the last more than one year, therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, he may be released on bail.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is serious allegation of gang rape against the applicant and other accused persons and victim in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. made allegation of rape against them and victim is hardly 12 years gold girl, therefore, considering the nature of allegation, applicant should not be released on bail.

¶15

Learned counsel for the informant further submits that as

¶16

when the indecent videos were viraled then victim informed the informant that applicant and co-accused persons committed rape with her and thereafter FIR of the present case was lodged and, therefore, the delay in lodging the FIR has been duly explained by the prosecution.

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶18

Victim of the case is hardly 12 years old girl and she made serious allegation of gang rape against the applicant and other coaccused persons and she was not only gang raped but accused persons also posted her indecent videographs of gang rape on social media which were recovered during investigation.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant could not place any good reason of the false implication of applicant.

¶20

Therefore, from the discussions made above, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected.

¶22

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶23

Order Date :- 12.5.2023 SKM

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aadil v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Aadil 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hasim Vs State of U.P.

Rina Devi Vs State of U.P.

Vimlesh Vs State of U.P.

Sanny Tomar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bhriguram Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Kallu Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others