Allowed

Shrawan Alias Sharwan v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2024BAIL/659/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge bail application allowed the release of the applicant whom police had charged with rape causing pregnancy. Noting an FIR delay, lack of medical corroboration regarding the alleged abortion, and contradictory victim statements, even without addressing core case merits, the court granted bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to six specific conditions.

Shrawan Alias Sharwan vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:12912

¶2

Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 659 of 2024 Applicant :- Shrawan Alias Sharwan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Saumya Singh,Kshitij Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶5

It is alleged in the FIR that on the false promise of marriage, in March, 2023, the accused called the victim outside the village and raped her. In June, 2023 again in the same manner, he committed rape upon her and due to that the victim became pregnant. On 31.07.2023 forcibly by administering a medicine she was aborted and she suffered bleeding. Ultimately after intervening of the mother of the victim, it was assured by the parents of the applicant that he shall marry the victim first in Court and thereafter it will be done following rituals, however, after few months later, the applicant refused to marry the victim.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the FIR has been lodged after a delay of 12 months. During investigation, section 313 Cr.P.C. has been dropped which falsifies the allegations of pregnancy and abortion. The victim as per the ossification test is 19 years old and as per the educational record, she is 24 years old. The victim is a consenting p arty.

¶7

It has been further submitted that there is no corroborative evidence and the statement of the victim under Section 161 and 164 are contradictory. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.11.2023 without having any criminal antecedent.

¶8

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

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

On due consideration to the statements of the victim under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.; delay in lodging FIR and lack of corroborative medical evidence, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent; he is languishing in jail

¶11

since 14.11.2023 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant, Shrawan Alias Sharwan, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 321/2023, under Sections 313/376 IPC, Police Station - Jayas, 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

Order Date :- 12.2.2024/R.C.

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shrawan Alias Sharwan v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shrawan Alias Sharwan v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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

Vimlesh @ Raka Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko.

Rishab Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Radheraman Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Akbar Ali @ Pappu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Ramesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Karan Ojha Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home