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

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:21628

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 329 of 2024 Appellant :- Salim Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mukesh Kumar Tewari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

In pursuance of earlier order, Shri Surendra Kumar Mishra, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ambedkar Nagar is present before this Court.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as Shri Piyush Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 09.01.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No.2177/2023 arising out of Case Crime No.141/2023 under Sections 376D, 504, 506 I.P.C., Section 67A of IT Act and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Bewana, District- Ambedkar Nagar.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant was falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 22.09.2023. During the course of investigation, statement of victim was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., in which, she stated that she was in conversation with one Kalam and he called him on the date of alleged incident and when they met, Kalam forcibly made physical relation with her in a grove near a primary school, thereafter, he made a call to someone and informed her that some of his friends are coming and she must allow them whatever they want to do, thereafter, he went away and his friends, namely, Salim (appellant), Sabir and Chhotu came and forcibly made physical relations with the victim and when she cried then the threat was given by Chhotu. It was also stated that when appellant was making physical relation with the victim, a video was shot and the threat was given that if she disclosed the alleged incident to anyone, then her video would be made viral, thereafter, victim went to her in-laws' house and after about the one year, the said video was made viral by the accused persons and it was seen by everyone in the village and when this fact came into the notice of parents as well as brother of the victim, then the F.I.R. of case in question was lodged. He

¶9

further submitted that statement of victim was also recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., in which, she has categorically stated that appellant along with his three friends made physical relations with her and video was prepared and after one year, the said video was made viral by the appellant but no mobile was recovered by the Investigating Officer or sent to F.S.L. for examination but all these facts were not considered by the trial court and impugned order was passed, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of appellant and submitted that Investigating officer, Shri Surendra Kumar Mishra, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ambedkar Nagar stated that video which was provided by the mother of the victim was taken into custody and in the said video, it was found that the appellant was making physical relationship with the victim and voice of other persons was also found in the said video. He further submitted that the place of incident is some forest area, therefore, the mobile phone of the appellant could not be recovered but the offence committed by the appellant is heinous in nature as the victim has been sexually abused, therefore, there is no illegality in the order passed by the trial court and the appellant is not entitled for any relief.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal, impugned order, statements of victim recorded under Sections 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C., statement of Investigating Officer, recovery memo of pen drive which was provided by the mother of the victim, in which, it was found that the victim was physically abused by the appellant, as well as other relevant documents; this Court is of the view that there is no illegality in the order passed by the trial court, therefore, the present appeal has no substance and is liable to be dismissed.

¶12

Accordingly, the present appeal is, hereby, dismissed.

¶13

Trial court is directed to conclude trial, expeditiously without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶14

Order Date :- 12.3.2024 V. Sinha

¶15

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

Salim v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salim v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

G.R.S.M. Memorial College of Pharmacy Thru. Chairman Manoj Kumar vs Sri M Devraj Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Technical Education Lko. and Another

Adarsh Pratap Singh vs Vineet Jaiswal, Superintendent of Police, Dist. Gonda and Another

Raju vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lko

Shivam Mehrotra @ Shivam Malhotra vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

Shivam Mehrotra @ Shivam Malhotra vs State of U.P. through secretary home department U.P Government civil secretariat Lucknow

Akhilesh Kumar Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another