Iqbal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24942 of 2025

Iqbal

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Jai Shanker Malviya, Taj Uddin Siddiqui
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 51

¶6

HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶8

The present second bail application has been filed by the applicantaccused in Case Crime No.328 of 2023, under Sections 328, 363, 376D, 506, 354D, 120B I.P.C. and Section 5G/ 6 POCSO Act, Police StationThakurdwara, District- Moradabad with the prayer to enlarge the applicantaccused on bail. The first bail application of applicant has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 08.05.2024.

¶9

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The prosecution version that applicant and co-accused have made video of victim or on that account she was molested, is wholly false. There is no credible evidence to support the said allegation. No such video has been seized during investigation. As per ossification test report, age of victim is 20 years. As per school record, her age has been shown as 17 years. It was submitted that victim is a major girl and she has shown her age less in educational record. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., victim has not made any specific allegation of rape. There are contradictions in the statements of victim, recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. Even as per statement of victim, she was called by co-accused Sahil by extending threat.

¶10

It is further submitted that after rejection of first bail application of applicant, statements of informant as well as of victim have been recorded before the trial Court and thus now there is no possibility of tampering with evidence. There are material contradictions and infirmities in the version of victim. Victim has not sustained any injury. The first information report was

¶11

BAIL No. 24942 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

lodged after seven days of the incident. Lastly, it was submitted that applicant is in jail since 19.08.2023, having no criminal history, and that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in trial.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that as per school record, age of victim is 17 years and in her statement she has made allegation of rape against applicant and co-accused.

¶15

Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, period of detention and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits, a case for bail is made out.

¶16

The bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant - Iqbal involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing each a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶18

i. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶19

ii. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate any of the prosecution witness.

¶20

iii. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶21

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

¶22

v. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶24

November 10, 2025 'SP'/-

¶25

(Raj Beer Singh,J.)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Iqbal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Iqbal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Tinku Kumar vs State of U.P.

Vivek Sharma vs State of U.P.

Deepak and Another vs State of U.P.

Gyanesh Kumar vs State of U.P.

Shiva Sharma vs State of U.P.

Saurabh vs State of U.P.