Allowed

Naeem @ Babadeen v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC2 Feb 2024/1192/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application filed by Naeem @ Babadeen in a case u/s 366, 376 IPC. The Court noted the victim's own admission of prior contact, the lack of recovery of her mobile phone or call details, and the absence of medical report inconsistencies, finding him eligible for bail on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the same amount subject to conditions.

Naeem @ Babadeen Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:9772

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1192 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Naeem @ Babadeen Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Yogeshwar Sharan Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.433 of 2023 under Sections 366, 376(2)/(Dha) of IPC, Police Station Tarabganj, District Gonda, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 12.12.2023. He further submitted that the victim was in relation with the applicant and as she has admitted in her statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. that she was frequently talking with the applicant on phone. He further submitted that the victim is a major and prudent lady and she went with the applicant on her own will, thereafter, due to annoyance, F.I.R. of case in question was lodged by the informant who is the mother of the victim, and thereafter, she came back and due to pressure of the family members, she partly supported the prosecution story. He further submitted that as per the prosecution case, victim was having mobile phone bearing number 639334569 at the time of leaving her house and in her statement, she stated that the mobile was taken by the applicant but the Investigating Officer has not asked any question about the cell phone of the victim and he also did not make any attempt for recovery of the aforesaid mobile phone and call details of the mobile phone of victim was also not recovered.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant that medico-legal examination of the victim was also conducted in the most sketchy manner and doctor has not asked the details of the incident from the victim as the said column is left blank in the medico-legal report. He also drew attention of this Court on the photograph of victim with the applicant. He further submitted

¶11

that applicant is having no criminal antecedent and charge sheet has already been filed and there is no possibility of tampering of any evidence. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of the applicant for grant of bail and submitted that the victim has supported the prosecution version in her statement recorded under section 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C. but he does not dispute this fact that mobile phone which was having by the victim was not recovered by the investigating officer and call details of the aforesaid was also not collected by him.

¶13

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., statement of victim recorded under Sections 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C., other relevant documents as well as totality of fact and circumstances, it is evident from the record that the victim was having a mobile phone but neither the mobile phone was recovered by the Investigation Officer nor the call details of the aforesaid mobile phone was collected by him, as the victim is a major and prudent lady and she has admitted in her statement that she was in conversation with the applicant, therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

Let applicant - Naeem @ Babadeen - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶16

(ii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case

¶19

of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶20

(v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.

¶21

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant 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 against him in accordance with law.

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 2.2.2024 V. Sinha

¶24

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Naeem @ Babadeen v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naeem @ Babadeen v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Nitish Yadav Alias Aman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

Shiv Pratap Singh @ Neeraj Lodhi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sameer @ Sameer Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 2 Others

Ishhak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Chandbabu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lucknow

Awdhesh Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another