Allowed

Azam Hussain v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 May 2023BAIL/8121/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for bail in a rape-cheating case where allegations stemmed from a post-rape marriage dispute. Court granted bail citing significant delay in FIR and money dispute motives, conditioning release on payment of settled amounts.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to condition to pay Rs. 2,01,000 to victim by end of July 2023.

Azam Hussain Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:121913

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8121 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Azam Hussain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satish Chandra Shukla,Abrar Alam,P.K. Singh,Sunil Kumar Dubey,Umair Mahmood Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Syed Faiz Hasnain,Syed Riyaz Askari

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri P.K. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Syed Faiz Hasnain, learned counsel for the informant and Dr. S. B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State-respondent.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 295 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506, 120-B, 376-D IPC, Police Station Mandawar, District Bijnor, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶9

FIR of the present case was lodged on 21.10.2022 against the applicant and co-accused Abid Ansari through an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. dated 6.10.2022 and according to the FIR, marriage of the informant was performed with one Jishan and thereafter some matrimonial dispute arose between husband and wife and with the help of the applicant who is an Advocate their matter was settled and on 18.2.2019, husband of the informant deposited Rs. Three lacs fifty thousand with the applicant and co-accused Abid Ansari and it was agreed between the parties that after divorce, said amount will be given to her and on 21.2.2019 when on the assurance of the applicant and co-accused Abid, informant came at his house then applicant committed rape with her and co-accused Abid prepared her videos and thereafter co-accused Abid also committed rape with her. It is further mentioned in the FIR that since then continuously informant is being sexually exploited by the applicant and co-accused Abid.

¶10

It is further mentioned in the FIR that on 28.1.2020 applicant provided three cheques to her but when she presented the cheques in the Bank then all the cheques were dishonoured and

¶11

on 28.9.2022, informant came to know that applicant and coaccused Abid are displaying her videos.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the entire allegations made against the applicant in the FIR are totally false and baseless and it is based on vague allegation of rape. He further submitted that as per the FIR on 21.9.2019 first time, informant was raped by the applicant but in spite of that application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved on 6.10.2022 i.e. after about more than one and a half years. He further submitted that this inordinate delay in moving the application itself shows that entire story of the victim is totally false.

¶13

He next submitted that actually some dispute arose between applicant and informant with regard to the payment as applicant was her Advocate and with the intervention of the police, matter was settled between both the parties and this fact is evident from annexure-6 to the affidavit which shows that both the parties in written entered into a compromise before the S.H.O. of P.S. Mandavar, District Bijnor and from its perusal it appears that informant agreed for Rs. Two lacs one thousand and applicant was also ready to pay the entire amount till 19.7.2022 but as again some dispute arose with regard to the payment of rest amount and thereafter on 21.10.2022, FIR of the present case was lodged through an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and even application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved on 6.10.2022 i.e. after compromise dated 19.6.2022 and therefore, it appears that due to dispute of money, applicant who is an advocate has been implicated in the present matter by the informant of the case and actually he never committed any rape with her.

¶14

He further submitted that there is specific allegation that coaccused Abid prepared indecent videos of the victim and thereafter both applicant and victim displayed the same but during investigation, no such videos of the victim could be recovered by the Investigating Officer.

¶15

He further submitted that in the counter affidavit, informant made serious allegation that applicant runs a gang and he used to lodge false FIRs against innocent persons but in reply of the same in rejoinder affidavit applicant categorically denied the allegation and stated that being counsel he was hired in several cases and he also lodged FIRs against the mining mafias and even if the alleged allegations against the applicant with regard to the false lodgement of the FIR are accepted then also it can only be a case of professional misconduct and applicant cannot be made accused for the offence under section 376 IPC. He further submitted that applicant is an advocate and he is in jail

¶16

since 17.12.2022.

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the amount agreed between the parties of Rs. Two lacs one thousand will be paid by the applicant by the end of July, 2023. He further submits that applicant is also under continuous medical treatment for his leg.

¶18

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is an advocate and he misused his position and not only duped the entire money of the informant but also sexually exploited her.

¶19

Learned counsel for the informant further submitted that although in the counter affidavit, five cases have been disclosed which were lodged by the applicant but he received information from his client that number of other cases were also lodged by the applicant against the several persons and therefore, applicant used to lodge false FIR against the innocent persons and thereafter he used to extract money from them but he could not dispute the fact that FIR of the present case was lodged through an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and even application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved after more than one and a half years and before lodgement of the FIR, a compromise was executed between applicant and informant on 19.6.2022 which has been annexed as annexure-6 to the affidavit and from its perusal, it appears that some dispute with regard to the payment was pending between both the parties and after about four months of compromise informant moved application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. with regard to the allegation of rape.

¶20

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

¶21

Applicant is a practising Advocate in District Bijnor and although it appears from the record that he misused his position being an Advocate and he duped the informant and he received Rs. Three lacs fifty thousand of her and thereafter he did not return the same but as far as the allegation of rape is concerned, it appears from the record that due to the dispute arose between both the parties with regard to the payment, after about one and half years, informant made allegation of rape against him and FIR of the present case was lodged after about more than one and half years through an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. and even application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved after one and a half years. Further before moving an application a compromise was executed between applicant and informant on

¶22

19.6.2022 (annexure-6) and from perusal of the same, it appears that dispute arose between both the parties with regard to the payment and till then, there was no allegation of rape.

¶23

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶24

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶25

Let the applicant- Azam Hussain, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶26

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶27

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶28

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.

¶29

(iv) The applicant shall pay the amount of 'Rs. Two lacs one thousand' to the informant as per compromise dated 19.6.2022 entered into between the parties, 'by the end of July, 2023'.

¶30

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶31

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.

¶32

Order Date :- 30.5.2023

¶33

Ankita

¶34

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Azam Hussain v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azam Hussain 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

Waseem Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Nafees Vs State of U.P.

Anadil Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Tyagi Vs State of U.P.

Brajesh Sachan @ Kukku Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikas Patel Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others