Girjesh Sahani vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6069

Court No. - 82

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11385 of 2024

Appellant :- Girjesh Sahani Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Arvind Prabodh Dubey,Ashok Kumar Giri

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶8

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Girjesh Sahani with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 25.10.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Kushinagar at Padrauna.

¶9

The prosecution has come forward with a case that a young lady of SC/ST caste was physically molested and physical relations were made with her by the accused appellant on the false pretext of marriage which continued for about 1-1/2 years and during the period of some days she stayed at the house of the accused as well, however, subsequently hurling abuses with caste related remarks the accused appellant refused to marry with prosecutrix. After investigation charge sheet has been submitted.

¶10

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 both the parties in this case are major persons. The physical and sexual relation were made between the two with free will and consent of the major victim. He further submitted that they have got married in a temple performing some ceremonies. It is fairly conceded before the Court that the accused appellant is ready and willing to marry with the prosecutrix. The trial Court while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and

¶11

erred in passing the same. Appellant is in jail since 9.8.2024. 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.

¶12

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 25.10.2024. It is vehemently argued that the relationship with the victim was made by the accused appellant only to fulfill his lust and ultimately he refused to marry with the victim.

¶13

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.

¶14

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, 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.

¶15

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

¶16

Let the appellant - Girjesh Sahani involved in Case Crime No. 405 of 2024 under Sections 376, 342, 323, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, Police Station - Kaptanganj, DistrictKushinagar 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.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

which he is suspected.

¶22

(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.

¶23

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

¶24

Order Date :- 15.1.2025 Fhd

¶25

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

Girjesh Sahani v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girjesh Sahani 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

Kartikey Gupta vs State of Up and Another

Amit Goel vs State of U.P through Its Principal Secretary (Home) and Another

Kalamuddin Alias Kalamu vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhay Dubey Alias Mathri vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Neta @ Geeta and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Rahul Negi vs State of U.P. and Another