Shahjad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:66183

Court No. - 71

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8601 of 2025

Applicant :- Shahjad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Bratendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant today in Court is taken on record.

¶7

Heard leaned counsel for the applicant-accused, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant-accused in Case Crime No. 173 of 2019, under Sections - 376-A, 376-B I.P.C. and Sections 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Uska Bazar, District - Siddharth Nagar with the prayer to enlarge the applicant-accused on bail.

¶9

The first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 01.02.2024, which is reproduced as under :-

¶10

"1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. None has appeared on behalf of the informant.

¶11

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 173 of 2019, under Sections - 376-A, 376-B I.P.C. and Sections 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Uska Bazar, District - Siddharth Nagar with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶12

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the accused-applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It was stated that provisions of Sections - 376-A and 376-D I.P.C. are not attracted in the present case. In her statement, victim has made merely vague allegations that applicant has done bad act against her. Victim has not sustained any injury. It is further submitted that during pendency of the case, both the parties have compromised the matter and in that connection applicant has already filed an application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of proceedings, which is pending before the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Lastly, it was submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 01.10.2019, having no previous criminal history, and that in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that victim is a 12 years old girl and that in her statement recorded under Sections - 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., she has clearly stated that while she has gone at the house of applicant-accused to deliver some utensil, the applicant committed rape upon her. It was further submitted by learned A.G.A. that since a 12 years old minor girl has made allegations of molestation against applicant, in such a case bail cannot be granted on the basis of alleged compromise between the parties.

¶14

I have considered rival submissions and perused the record.

¶15

In this case, the victim is a 12 years old girl, who has made allegations of molestation against applicant-accused. In such matters, bail cannot be granted merely on the ground that the informant and applicant-accused have amicably settled the dispute. Such matters require adjudication and trial on merits in accordance with law.

¶16

After considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, gravity of the offence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, no case for grant of bail is made out.

¶17

Accordingly, the instant bail application filed on behalf of applicant is rejected .

¶18

However, keeping in view the period of detention of the applicant, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to decide the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of copy of the order.

¶19

A copy of this order be forwarded to the concerned trial court for necessary compliance."

¶20

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. In her statement during investigation, victim has merely stated that applicant has done bad act against her. It was submitted that the prosecution version is not supported by the medical evidence and victim has not sustained any injury. First bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 01.02.2024 and that trial court was directed to expedite the trial and to concluded the same within a period of one year but except statement of informant and victim, no other witness has been examined. It was stated that victim was examined before the trial court on 14.01.2019 and after that no statement of any other witness has been recorded so far whereas since then, a period of more than six years has passed. It was further submitted that an application under Section 482 CrPC was also filed on behalf of the applicant for quashing of proceedings on the basis of compromise

¶21

between the parties and in that matter, an interim order has already been passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Lastly, it was stated that the applicant is in jail since 01.10.2019 and thus, he has already undergone the detention of about five and a half years and trial of the case would take sufficient long time. It was stated that the applicant has no criminal history and in case the applicant is granted bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate during trial.

¶22

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim is a minor girl aged about 12 years and that first bail application of applicant has already been rejected on merits and no new ground is made out.

¶23

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and all attending facts, particularly period of detention, stage of trial and the fact that no prosecution witness has been examined in trial since last four years, without expressing any opinion on the merits, a case for bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed .

¶24

Let the applicant-accused - Shahjad involved in aforesaid crime 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:

¶25

(i) The applicant-accused shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶26

(ii) The applicant-accused shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶27

(iii) The applicant-accused shall appear before the trial court on the

¶28

date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶29

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

¶30

(v) The applicant-accused 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.

¶31

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

¶32

Order Date :- 28.4.2025 Rama Kant

¶33

Digitally signed by :- RAMA KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahjad 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