Allowed

Mohd. Karib v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Allahabad HC24 Sept 2024BAIL/10160/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that the applicant is entitled to bail in a rape case where the victim refused medical examination and statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNS were inconsistent. The court fixed conditions including surrender bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Mohd. Karib released on bail under S. 333/64 BNS subject to furnishing personal bonds and two sureties of Rs. 20,000 each.

Mohd. Karib vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:66057

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10160 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Karib Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Pratap Mishra,Kashi Prasad Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The F.I.R. in question was lodged alleging therein that the applicant came to the home of the cousin sister of the informant and committed rape on her. Subsequently, in the statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S., the victim stated that the relationship in between the applicant and the victim continued for over a period of six months after which the applicant went Oman and when he came back allegedly physical relations were formed against her wishes. The statement of forming physical relations were reiterated in the statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the victim has refused to undergo medical examination. The victim has not supported the prosecution story in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of B.N.S.S. The tentative age of the victim is above 18 years. Hence, the applicant who is languishing in jail since 14.8.2024 having no criminal history, may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. also opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Considering the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of B.N.S.S. which do not support the prosecution story and the fact that the victim has refused to undergo

¶11

medical examination coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 14.8.2024, without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant Mohd. Karib be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.0111 of 2024, under Section 333/64 Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, Police Station Rahimabad, District Lucknow on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

Order Date :- 24.9.2024

¶18

Shukla

¶19

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

Mohd. Karib v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Karib v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

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

Atul Yadav @ Pradeep Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home , Lko.

Dhiru @ Dhirendra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home , Lko.

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

U.P. State Industrial Development Authority,Trans Ganga City,Unnao Thru. Its Senior Project Officer vs Deepak Dwivedi

Smt. Parwati vs State of U.P. Thur. Addl. Chief Secy Deptt. of Home Lko.

Shekhar Singh @ Ashcharya Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs Lko.