Allowed

Shishupal Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2024/67/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under criminal miscellaneous proceedings, the Allahabad High Court allowed the applicant's release after finding insufficient corroborative evidence tying him to the offence, noting that main allegations were against others.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bonds and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each with standard bond conditions.

Shishupal Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:2395

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 67 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Shishupal Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajat Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Supplementary afÏdavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. None turned up on behalf of the informant despite notice.

¶8

3 . In terms of the F.I.R., it was alleged that the daughter of the informant was enticed on the pretext of getting a job in Ludhiana and the applicant as well as one Ashish committed rape on her on various occasions. A report was lodged through an application made before Mahila Aayog. The allegation of enticing away was made on 05.03.2022 and there the allegations of rape were made. Subsequently, the daughter of the informant called through a phone number revealing that she was quite scared. It was also stated that the daughter of the informant somehow escaped to Delhi and thereafter the informant brought her from Delhi. It was also

¶9

stated that he was informed that the daughter was kept in a room at Delhi. It was also alleged by the victim that one lady namely Sheetal and her husband used to force her into prostitution. It was also stated that if the F.I.R. of the victim was not registered, as such, she will be forced to commit suicide. In the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim has disclosed her age as 17 years and stated she used to stay with her family at Ludhiana and used to work at a factory and one lady namely Sheetal informed her about the applicant and Ashish and she allured her to get another job to another factory and took her to the station. She also stated that she was brought to Lucknow by the said lady Sheetal, thereafter the allegations of rape were leveled against the applicant and Ashish. Similar statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

¶10

4. The counsel for the applicant argues that apart from the statements, there is no material to link the applicant with the offence in question, there is no medical report in support of the prosecution story. He has filed a supplementary afÏdavit disclosing that even as per the call detail record, which reveals that the victim had gone with one Ravi and had solemnized marriage on 01.04.2023 and was living with him, which is revealed from the call detail record annexed with the application as Annexure No. 5. The applicant has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 05.03.2023.

¶11

5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer by

¶12

arguing that the situation of the victim was used by the applicant to commit the offence and thus the bail application of the applicant should be rejected.

¶13

6. Considering the submissions, prima facie apart from the statement under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., the main allegations are against one Sheetal and her husband, no evidence exists to corroborate the version under Sections 161 &164 Cr.P.C., the applicant has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 05.03.2023 and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

7. Let the applicant Shishupal Singh be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 601 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376-D, 342, 323, 506 IPC, Section 5G/6 POCSO Act and Section 3(1) (Dha) 3(2)(V), 3(2)(VA) SC/ST Act, Police Station Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow, on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶16

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or

¶17

suspected of the commission; and

¶18

(c) 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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

Order Date :- 9.1.2024 Arun

¶20

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

Shishupal Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shishupal Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

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

Irshad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lucknow and 4 Others

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

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Mohd. Akeel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4OTHERS

Chhotu Alias Umesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow

Santosh Rawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko