Soeab Alias Sohib vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:52487

Court No. - 80

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 706 of 2025

Appellant :- Soeab Alias Sohib Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ashish Kumar Pandey,Nandini Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed in the matter is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record. None appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2 despite service of notice.

¶8

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Soeab alias Sohib with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 2.1.2025 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Ghaziabad and release the appellant on bail in Case Crime No.708 of 2024 under Sections 64, 351(2) B.N.S and Section 3 (2) (5) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Vijay Nagar, District Ghaziabad.

¶9

The victim lady developed friendly relations with the appellant and on his instruction, on 19.9.2024, she met him at Samrat Chowk, who seduced and lured her and took her to Royal Hotel and made physical relations with her and then left her away. Subsequently when he again called the victim, she refused to come which caused annoyance to the appellant and he threatened her for the dire consequences. The victim belongs to SC/ST community. F.I.R. was lodged and after investigation, charge-sheet was submitted in the matter.

¶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 any offence at all. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. It is also submitted that the prosecution has come forward with the story which is totally false and fabricated. In fact, this is a case of consensual relationship between the two major persons of opposite sex. It is also submitted that the informant / victim of this case is a major lady. She, on her own

¶11

free will and consent, came in contact with the appellant and made physical relations with him. It is also submitted that in her statement recorded under section 180 B.N.S.S. she has corroborated the prosecution version, although she refused to be medically examined for internal and external examination. In her statement recorded under section 183 B.N.S.S. she has stated her age to be 18 years and has admitted that she had some friendly relations with the appellant and they enjoyed the company of each other. She has admitted that on the call of appellant, she went to meet him, who took her in a hotel where physical relations were made between the two and when subsequently he again called her, she refused, on which she was threatened by the appellant. It is also submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 28.9.2024 having no criminal history to his credit. It is further submitted that the bail application of the appellant has been rejected in an illegal manner by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Ghaziabad. It is further submitted that the Court concerned while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. 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 A.G.A. opposed the appeal.

¶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 and also taken into account the fact that the victim was never forced to go with the appellant nor the physical relations between the two were made forcibly by the appellant but the evidence on record reveals that prima facie it is a case of consensual relationship between the two major persons of opposite sex and that no criminal history has brought to the notice of the Court, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court concerned erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶15

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

¶16

Let the appellant Soeab alias Sohib involved in Case Crime No.708 of 2024 under Sections 64, 351(2) B.N.S and Section 3 (2) (5) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Vijay Nagar, District Ghaziabad, 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.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(iv) 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.

¶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 :- 4.4.2025

¶23

ss

¶24

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

Soeab Alias Sohib v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soeab Alias Sohib 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

Durgesh Kannaujiya vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Somveer vs State of U.P. and Another

Padamveer @ Paramveer Yadav @ Sonu Yadav vs State of Up and Another

Sanjay Yadav vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Abdul Waheed vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Smt. Soni Tiwari vs State of U.P. and 7 Others