Aftab Alias Abdul Mannan Alias Mohammad Aftab vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:4424

Court No. - 82

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10393 of 2024

Appellant :- Aftab Alias Abdul Mannan Alias Mohammad Aftab Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Aftab Alias Abdul Mannan Alias Mohammad Aftab with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 8.10.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Azamgarh in Bail Application No.1004461 of 2024.

¶8

The major daughter of the informant was enticed away by the named accused persons. FIR was lodged and investigation is still pending. An offence under Section 64 BNS was added during investigation.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. Essential ingredients to establish an offence under SC/ST Act are also missing in this case. It is further submitted that the victim of this case is a major lady and she at her own free will and consent had gone with the appellant and she had been a consenting party for the physical relations between the two. It is also submitted that as per statement of the victim under Section 183 BNSS she was entangled with the appellant for about 2-3 years. Further she states that when the accused appellant called her, she at her own free will went to the appellant and stayed for some days with him. It is a case of consensual relationship. The medical evidence does not corroborate the prosecution version. It is further submitted that the appellant has no criminal history to his credit. The trial Court while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in

¶10

right perspective and erred in passing the same. Appellant is in jail since 14.9.2024. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

¶11

On the other hand, learned AGA opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to scheduled caste community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order dated 8.10.2024. It is further submitted that the FSL report is still awaited.

¶12

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.

¶13

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, possibility of consensual relationship, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The 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 and the appeal is to be allowed.

¶14

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

¶15

Let the appellant - Aftab Alias Abdul Mannan Alias Mohammad Aftab involved in Case Crime No. 443 of 2024 under Sections 64, 87, 352 BNS & Section 3(1) Da, 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station - Nizamabad, District-Azamgarh be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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.

¶16

(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

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

¶18

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the

¶19

offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶20

(v) 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.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 9.1.2025 Fhd

¶23

Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aftab Alias Abdul Mannan Alias Mohammad Aftab v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aftab Alias Abdul Mannan Alias Mohammad Aftab v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Punam Dubey vs State of U.P. and Another

Girish Upadhyay and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Rijwana Bano vs State of U.P. and Another

Vipin Saini vs State of U.P. and Another

Daadu @ Chelaram vs State of Up

Jitendra Singh Patel vs State of U.P. and Another