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

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:2559

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 282 of 2023 Appellant :- Rashid @ Khunai Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko And 2 Others

¶4

Counsel for Appellant :- Rajendra Singh,Vimal Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 19.07.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Case Crime No.134/2019 under Sections 363, 366, 376, 120B I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police StationMakhi, District- Unnao.

¶8

It is evident from the record that notice has already been served upon private respondent, however, none appears on his behalf. Therefore, the matter is being proceeded for final disposal.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 29.01.2020. He further submitted that the victim is a major lady and she joined the company of appellant on her own and was residing in live in relation with the appellant for the period of six months, thereafter, on the pressure of family members, she lodged F.I.R. of case in question. He further submitted that trial court failed to consider the statement of victim recorded under Sections 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C. and also failed to consider this fact that the Investigating Officer, without examining the site where the victim was allegedly detained for six months, filed charge sheet.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as per the statement of victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she is aged about 19 years and on 31.05.2019, after having her cloths from Methitikur, she was going back to her house, on the way, appellant met her and advised her to sit as a pillion rider on his motorcycle for dropping her at her village, thereafter, she joined his company but in place of dropping her to her village Rampur, appellant took her in the groove of one Uma Shankar, and

¶11

thereafter, took her to house of Uma Shankar at Nindemau, on the next date, victim was brought to Lucknow where appellant and victim stayed for about one month, thereafter, they came to Unnao and after some time, returned to Lucknow. It was further stated that the appellant was forcibly making physical relation with victim, on her objection, she was being assaulted and she was also not allowed to go outside. It was further stated that on 04.12.2019, victim left the alleged room and came to her father.

¶12

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as per the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., victim met a girl at Duddheeshwar who came to purchase vegetables and narrated about the incident then she advised her to go away and one day victim pretended that she was going to bring the milk and then left the accommodation of appellant. He further submitted that the statement of victim as well as that girl was not recorded by the Investigating Officer and charge sheet was submitted in the most mechanical manner. He further submitted that appellant does not have any criminal antecedent and there is no possibility of tampering of evidence, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of appellant but he does not dispute this fact that victim is a major lady, he further conceded this fact that the Investigating Officer, without examining the site where the victim was allegedly detained for six months, filed charge sheet.

¶14

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal, statement of victim recorded under Sections 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C., as well as other relevant documents; it is evident that Investigating Officer, without examining the site where the victim was allegedly detained for six months, filed charge sheet, as no statements of neighbors were recorded. In 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.

¶15

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 19.07.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Unnao is hereby set aside.

¶16

Let the appellant- Rashid @ Khunai involved in the

¶17

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

(i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will 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.

¶19

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

¶20

(iii) In case, the appellant 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.

¶21

(iv) 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. If in the opinion of the trial court 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 against him in accordance with law.

¶22

Order Date :- 10.1.2024 V. Sinha

¶23

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

Rashid @ Khunai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rashid @ Khunai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and 2 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

Shahnawaz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

Samod Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lucknow and Another

Om Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. and Another

Munnulal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Hanuman Singh Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Pawan Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 4 Others