Allowed

Tabrez Alam v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Oct 2024CRLA/5626/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appellant's criminal appeal against the rejection of his bail application. Relying on the ossification test report indicating the victim was a major and evidence of consent, the court set aside the trial court's order and granted bail subject to strict conditions regarding witness intimidation and evidence tampering.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, and committing similar offences.

Tabrez Alam vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:177818

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5626 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Tabrez Alam Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Aishwarya Pratap Singh,Rahul Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. for the State is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

This Criminal Appeal has been preferred under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to set aside the order dated 17.05.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Bail Application No. 1200 of 2024 (Tabrez Alam Vs. State) arising out of Case Crime No. 55 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 376, 504, 506 IPC, Section 3 and 5(1) Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 and Section 3(2)(v) of the S.C./S.T. Act, 1989, Police Station-Ahirauli Bazar, DistrictKushinagar.

¶9

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that as per the ossification test report, the victim was major and was in consensual relationship with the appellant. The victim knew the appellant for the past one year and wanted to solemnise marriage with him. The victim in her examination-in-chief had deposed that she was in love with the appellant and no sexual violence took place. The appellant has no other criminal history and is languishing in jail since 27.02.2024.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail and could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶11

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.

¶12

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a fit case for bail. The learned trial Court erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside.

¶13

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.

¶14

Let the appellant- Tabrez Alam involved in Case Crime No. 55 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 376, 504, 506 IPC, Section 3 and 5(1) Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 and Section 3(2)(v) of the S.C./S.T. Act, 1989, Police StationAhirauli Bazar, District-Kushinagar be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶15

The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶18

The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶19

The appellant 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.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶21

Order Date :- 13.11.2024 Shivani

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHIVANI SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tabrez Alam v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tabrez Alam v. State of U.P. 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

Satish Sharma Alias Kaluwa vs State of U.P. and Another

Lokesh Sharma and Another vs State of Up and Another

Ramveer Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shahjeen vs State of Up and Another

Smt Meena Devi vs State of Up and 4 Others

Devanand Lodhi vs State of U.P.