Allowed

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

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023BAIL/58208/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application, this single-judge court considered the applicant's submission that the victim was a consenting party in a marriage. Without expressing an opinion on merits, the court found that the applicant had made out a case for bail and ordered release on personal and two local sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties subject to standard conditions including appearance and no tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 58208 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Arif Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjai Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and the victim are major, who have solemnsied marriage out of their own free will and consent without any coercion. He further submits that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has specifically stated that she loves with the applicant and had gone with him at Maharastra, thereafter to Nasik, where she has has solemnised marriage with the applicant and that the applicant and the victim were living together as husband and wife and she has pregnancy of five months.He thus submits that the victim has not supported the prosecution version. He next submits that the victim is a consenting party and therefore, no offence against the applicant is made out. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to

¶7

accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 20.09.2022 having no criminal history.

¶8

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, he does not deserve any indulgence. ]

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence, and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence the bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let applicant Arif Ali involved in Case Crime No.215 of 2021 under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., and Section 5(J)II/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Takulwa, District Deoria, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶11

A. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

B. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

C. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶14

D. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is an accused, or suspected, of the commission of he is suspected.

¶15

E. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any

¶16

inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶18

Order Date :- 7.2.2023 S.Ali

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arif 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rinku Vs State of U.P.

Kaluaa Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lalitesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Reema Chaursiya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gangaram @ Sandeep Sonkar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sonu @ Aman Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others