Salman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:65868

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1605 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Salman

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others

¶6

Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Mishra,Mohammad Imaran Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandra Bhanu Singh

¶7

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶8

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State on this second bail application, the first having been rejected by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 5.4.2022 passed in Bail No.15077 of 2021 and perused the record.

¶9

2. It is alleged in the prosecution case that on 2.1.2019 at about 4.00p.m., the victim while she went to purchase household goods at Materwa crossing, the accused persons Salman and Islam came near her and put handkerchief on her mouth and dragged her in a Bolero car, in which, Altaf was already there. They took her to Raebareli. The victim fainted due to powder on the handkerchief. On the next day, when she gained consciousness, she found herself at Delhi. Salman used to rape her in the night. Ultimately, on 12.1.2019 at about 7.00p.m., Salman left the victim near Materwa. After that, she returned home.

¶10

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that under changed circumstance, he is pressing the present bail application. He has filed statement of the victim before the court by way of supplementary affidavit where the victim has been declared hostile. It is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated. As per radiological examination, she is 17 years old. The victim has denied prosecution case totally before the

¶11

court. Even otherwise, after statement of the victim is recorded, there is no chance of tampering the prosecution evidence. The applicant is in jail since 29.6.1021.

¶12

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that the victim has been declared hostile.

¶14

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the victim has been declared hostile, status report dated 19.7.2024 of the trial court, prosecution evidence is complete, the case is fixed for statement under section 313 CrPC, there is no chance of tampering evidence, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶15

6. Let the applicant Salman, involved in Case Crime No.93 of 2019 under sections 363, 366-A, 342, 376, 506 I.P.C., 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Mohanganj, district Amethi 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

(iii) 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.

¶19

(iv) The applicant 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 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.

¶20

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

(vi) 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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

7. The application is allowed accordingly.

¶23

Order Date :- 23.9.2024 kkb/

¶24

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Salman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajeet Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Furkan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Ajeet Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Annexe Bhawan Civil Sectt. Lko

Amjad @ Pandit Vs State of U.P.

Jalis Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. and 3 Others

Mritunjay Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.