Allowed

Irfan Iftekar Sait (as Per Charge Sheet - Irfan) v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Allahabad HC24 May 2024/1580/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal challenged the rejection of bail arising under SC/ST Act and IPC 376D. The High Court found substance in the appeal due to discrepancies in the prosecution case and the denial of medico-legal examination by the victim, ordering the rejection set aside and granting bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order of 24.01.2023 set aside; appellant released on bail by furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties of the like amount.

Irfan Iftekar Sait (as Per Charge Sheet - Irfan) Vs State… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:39444

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1580 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Irfan Iftekar Sait (As Per Charge Sheet - Irfan) Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Abdul Malik,Amar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit and Vakalatnama filed by Ms. Ruby Gupta, Advocate alongwith Sri Uttam Kumar Awasthi, Advocate on behalf of opposite party No. 2/complainant in the Court today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶8

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the order dated 24.01.2023 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Bail Application No. 495/2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 235 of 2021, under Section- 376D I.P.C. and Section3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Aliganj, District- Lucknow, whereby, the bail application of the appellant has been rejected.

¶9

While pressing the instant application for bail, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case.

¶10

He further stated that co-accused persons namely Aseem Shakil and Nawazish Bin Shams have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 26.07.2023 and 09.01.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal Nos. 657 of 2022 and 1504 of 2022. Copies of bail orders of co-accused are on record. In these circumstances, the appellant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶11

Relevant portion of the order dated 09.01.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1504 of 2022 on reproduction reads as under:-

¶12

"4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant was falsely implicated in the present case only with the intention to make realise money from him by way of blackmailing. He further submitted that the prosecution case is that the victim was a major lady and working as a house-maid for her survival and three months ago from the lodging of the F.I.R., applicant met her and introduced himself as one Vishal Singh Thakur, thereafter, he started conversation with her and also took away Rs.2,49,000/-, thereafter, committed rape with her and gave life threat on 21.10.2021, thereafter, he took Rs.47,000/- from her and ran away, one mobile phone amounting Rs.20,000/- was also taken away from the victim. He further submitted that it is highly improbable that a house-maid is financing

¶13

such huge amount to the appellant. He further submitted that the victim also denied her medico-legal examination. He further submitted that the charge sheet was submitted and there is no possibility of tampering of evidences. He further submitted that appellant does not have any criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 07.12.2021, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of appellant and submitted that after detailed investigation, charge sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer as the victim was cheated and raped by the appellant but he does not dispute this fact that the victim has denied her medico-legal examination as well as no evidence of alleged transaction between the appellant and victim has been provided.

¶15

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal as well as other relevant documents; it is evident that victim is a major lady and was working as a house maid and as per the prosecution case, about 2.5 lac rupees was taken away by the appellant but the details of alleged transaction was not provided by the victim, as the victim denied her medico-legal examination, on such circumstances, this Court is of the view that learned trial court failed to consider the aforesaid aspects, hence, the aforesaid impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Resultantly, in the above facts and circumstances of the case, the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the present appeal has substance, and it is accordingly allowed, and the impugned order dated 21.05.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow is hereby set aside.

¶17

Let the appellant- Nawazish Bin Shams involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-"

¶18

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel including that co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court.

¶19

Upon due consideration of arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents and also the fact that co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court and keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

¶20

Order dated 24.01.2023 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Bail Application No. 495/2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 235 of 2021, under Section- 376D I.P.C. and Section- 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police StationAliganj, District- Lucknow, is hereby set aside.

¶21

Let the appellant- Irfan Iftekar Sait (As Per Charge Sheet - Irfan) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal

¶22

bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :-

¶23

(i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶24

(ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶25

(iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es).

¶26

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶27

(v) 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.

¶28

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

¶29

(vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶30

(viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶31

In case of default of above conditions it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶32

As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order.

¶33

Order Date :- 24.5.2024 Arun/-

¶34

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Irfan Iftekar Sait (as Per Charge Sheet - Irfan) v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irfan Iftekar Sait (as Per Charge Sheet - Irfan) v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Surya Nath Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shakeel Ahmad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Suraj @ Bauva Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Sarvesh Yadav @ Sheru Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Harinaam Yadav Alias Hanni Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ajjoo Vs State of U.P.