Allowed

Sikandar Ansari v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2023CRLA/11220/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge set aside the impugned order rejecting bail against under-trial appellant Sikandar Ansari. The High Court quashed the bail rejection, citing fundamental rights under Article 21 and severe jail overcrowding without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Appellant Sikandar Ansari released on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions regarding tampering with witnesses, attending court, and refraining from criminal activity.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:231922

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11220 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Sikandar Ansari Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Pradeep Kumar,Piyush Patel Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 19.10.2023 passed by the Special Judge Exclusive Special Court (SC/ST Act), Maharajganj in Case Crime No. 128 of 2023, under Sections 376, 504, 506 of IPC, and under Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station Bargadwa, District Maharajganj.

¶8

The prosecution case as per the F.I.R is that appellant was making physical relation with the informant on the pretext of marriage since last two years. On 16.02.2023 at 6:30 p.m appellant had taken the informant to Robertsganj hotel and sexually assaulted her and on 19.06.2023 at around 7:00 p.m appellant hurled abused and addressed her with caste related words and had beaten her.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case.The informant in the F.I.R herself admitted that she was having physical relations with the appellant prior to her marriage. She is aged about 23 years and was a consenting party. It is submitted by the informant that even after her marriage she continued to establish physical relation with the appellant. The informant refuse to undergo medical examination, therefore, the allegation are not corroborated with any medical evidence. Appellant is languishing in jail since 24.08.2023 having no criminal history. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. assisted by the learned counsel for the respondent have supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the

¶11

appellant but could not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects of the matter.

¶12

It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the trial court has not properly considered the case of the appellant. Hence, in view of above consideration, the impugned order of rejection of bail is, hereby, set aside.

¶13

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, Court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Let appellant, Sikandar Ansari be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶15

(i) The appellant 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶17

(iii) The appellant 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 of Cr.P.C.

¶18

(iv) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶19

(v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶20

(vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed in accordance with law.

¶22

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶23

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶24

The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶25

Order Date :- 7.12.2023 PS

¶26

Digitally signed by :- POOJA SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sikandar Ansari v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sikandar Ansari v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Shaisata Khatoon and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Huma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 9 Others

Tanu and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Brijmohan and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manish Rai @ Pampam Rai Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Boby Vs State of U.P. and Another