Allowed

Shakeel v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Mar 2023BAIL/7397/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed to the accused charged with rape and other offenses. The court found the medical evidence neutral, no corroborating evidence of foul play, the accused had no criminal history, and there was no likelihood of abscondance, leading to the grant of bail on personal bond and sureties with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with witnesses, cooperating in trial, and not seeking adjournments.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7397 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Shakeel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sudhir Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant application for bail has been moved on behalf of the applicant- Shakeel with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 953 of 2022, under Sections 376, 342, 506 IPC, Police Station- Kankerkhera, District- Meerut, during the pendency of the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel contends that the allegations are not accepted to the applicant accused. He had a tailoring shop in front of the house of the victim. His some money was due against the victim and only to avoid the payments the victim with the connivance of her husband lodged the FIR after concocting a false story of forceful rape learned counsel further contends that no video could be collected by the I.O. to strengthen the allegation that the victim was forcefully raped on the basis of video of the victim at the time of her bath. He further contends that the allegations are not corroborated by the injury report. He further contends that as per prosecution version the accused and the victim were in illicit relation for about more than 2 years if it was so why no FIR complaint was lodged earlier. There is no criminal history of the accused and there is likelihood of his abscondance. There is no proof that the husband of the victim was ever ill and in connection of her divine treatment, the victim contacted the accused.

¶8

Contrary to the above learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. contends that the victim has supported the prosecution version in her statement under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. her husband has also supported the prosecution version in his statement. The victim has also stated to the doctor regarding commission of crime by the accused with her.

¶9

Heard both the parties and perused the record it is a case between the two adult persons though there is the statement of the victim and her husband under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. in support of the prosecution version but there is no evidence that the so-called alleged video of the victim was prepared by the accused. The medical is neutral so far as the rape is concerned. Except the version of the victim and her husband there is no iota of evidence in support of the prosecution version. There is no criminal history of the accused, there is no likelihood of his abscondance there is no independent witness that any pressure was mounted by the applicant regarding conversion upon the victim on the basis of the above video. No ganda tabiz have been recovered by the I.O. alleged to be given by the accused to the victim or her husband.

¶10

On the basis of the above discussion the bail application is allowed .

¶11

Let the applicant - Shakeel be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial;

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment;

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail;

¶15

The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any 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;

¶16

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, in case the witnesses are present in court;

¶17

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, default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the

¶18

trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

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

¶20

It is made clear that the trial of the aforesaid case shall be conducted without being influenced by any observation made herein above which are confined to the disposal of the instant application for bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 24.3.2023 Satish

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shakeel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakeel v. State of U.P.

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

Jugnu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neeraj Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Anil @ Chhote Vs State of U.P.

Faizan Vs State of U.P.

Ram Bharat Bind Vs State of U.P.

B.N.S.D. Shiksha Niketan Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Vs the Regfional Provident Fund Commissioner and Another