Fahimuddin Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31462

Court No. - 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1830 of 2025

Applicant :- Fahimuddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. submits that notice of the instant application has been served upon the informant/opposite party no. 2 and opposite party no. 3/Child Welfare Committee, Amroha on 25.02.2025. The receiving endorsements produced by the learned A.G.A. are taken on record. However, no one appears on behalf of the said opposite parties nor any counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf.

¶7

Copy of the C.D. No. 4 dated 18.08.2024 and High School certificate of the victim produced by learned A.G.A. are taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mohammad Arshad Khan, learned counsel for the informant-opposite party no.2 as well as Sri Anupam Anand, learned brief holder for the Stateopposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

This application under Section 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 426 of 2024, under Sections 70(1), 333, 115(2), 351(2) B.N.S. and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Hasanpur, District J.P. Nagar (Amroha).

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the informant herself is the victim. The applicant was not named in the first information report, even the date and time of the alleged incident has not been disclosed. In the first information report, allegation of rape has been levelled against the co-accused Lavi @ Shivam. Subsequently, in the statement of the victim under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS the name of the applicant was introduced. It is contended that the said statements have been made to aggravate the offence and save the failing prosecution case. As per the high school certificate as well as the ossification date report, the victim was aged more than eighteen years. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is pending

¶11

and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶12

Learned brief holder for the State and the counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report.

¶14

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the fact, that the applicant was not named in the FIR. As per the ossification test report, the victim was aged eighteen years. In the FIR, the allegation of rape has been levelled against the co-accused Lavi @ Shivam, subsequently, the victim in her statement under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, the name of the applicant was disclosed. The contradictions in F.I.R. and in the statement of the victim under Sections 180 B.N.S.S. and 183 B.N.S.S. discredit the prosecution case, especially when the victim was the informant, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶15

In the event of arrest, the applicant- Fahimuddin be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 193 (3) BNSS, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶17

(ii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶19

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is

¶20

at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶21

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶22

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶23

The application stands disposed of.

¶24

Order Date :- 5.3.2025 Sachin Mishra

¶25

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fahimuddin 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