Allowed

Mohd. Jakir Hussain v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC8 Dec 2024CRA/1015/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal against the rejection of bail. The court was inclined to release the appellant on bail, setting aside the impugned order, despite the serious accusations including rape. Bail was granted with a personal bond and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order rejecting bail is set aside. The appellant is directed to be released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety.

Mohd. Jakir Hussain Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

2024:CGHC:48339

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRA No. 1015 of 2024

¶6

Mohd. Jakir Hussain S/o Mohd. Jahangir Hussain Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Gevalbeedha Pine Police Line Gaya, P.S. Rampur Gaya, District Gaya (Bihar) At Present Resident Of Bheekhapali, P.S. And Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶7

... Appellant

¶8

versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

¶12

For Appellant : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sahu, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate

¶13

Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board

¶14

09/12/2024

¶15

The present appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 25.04.2024, passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Mahasamund , in Crime No. 94 of 2024, whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail has been rejected.

¶16

The brief facts of the case are that, on 17.02.2024, the nephew of the complainant informed her that a video is getting viral in mobile phones

¶17

VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed byVEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2024.12.12 13:55:21 +0530

¶18

¶19

and when she had seen the video, it was found that it was the obscene video of her daughter, then on 19.02.2024, she lodged the report against the appellant. The offence has been registered and the statement of the prosecutrix under Sections 161 and 164 of CrPC have been recorded. The appellant was initially arrested on 22.02.2024 for the alleged offences of Sections 354(c), 384, 506-B of IPC, Section 67 of Information Technology Act and Section 3(2)(v)(a) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. After his arrest, the appellant was released on bail by the learned Trial Court. Thereafter, the offence of Section 376 of IPC has also been added and the appellant was again arrested on 18.04.2024 and then the charge sheet has been filed.

¶20

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that, at the time of lodging of the report, no offence of Section 376 of IPC was added and the learned Trial Court has granted bail to the appellant for the other offences. It is only when the charge sheet was filed, the offence of Section 376 of IPC was added, in which the appellant was re-arrested on 18.04.2024 and since then he is in jail. The prosecutrix was a major girl, having consensual physical relation with the appellant. Only to extort money from the appellant, the present FIR has been lodged by her mother. The appellant is in jail since 18.04.2024 and final adjudication of the case will take its own time. Therefore, the appeal may be allowed and the appellant may be enlarged on bail.

¶21

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials annexed with the appeal.

¶23

¶24

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of the allegations and materials collected during the investigation, further considering the fact that initially the appellant was released on bail by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 06.03.2024, and subsequently he was again arrested on 18.04.2024 for the offence under Section 376 of IPC, final adjudication of the case will take its own time. Therefore, I am inclined to release the appellant on bail.

¶25

Consequently, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed and the impugned order dated 25.04.2024, passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Mahasamund , in Crime No. 94 of 2024 is set aside. The appellant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. the appellant shall also abide by the following conditions:-

¶26

(i) 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 fact to the Court. (ii) The appellant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and (iii) The appellant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial unless his personal presence is exempted by the trial Court.

¶27

It is made clear that any observation made in this order is restricted

¶28

only for consideration of the present appeal. The learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits without being influenced by any observation made in this order.

¶29

Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶30

ved

Mohd. Jakir Hussain v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Jakir Hussain v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Koushilya Bai Vs Omilal

Vijendra John Vs Smt. Sujata John

Munnalal Choudhary Vs Union of India

Sonu @ Ajit Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vishal Kumar Rajak Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramkumar Sarthi @ Dau Vs State of Chhattisgarh