Hanif v. State of U.P

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49887 of 2023 Applicant :- Hanif Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Adil Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State. There is allegation against the applicant of committing the offence of rape of a major girl after entering into her house and also committing the offence of criminal intimidation. Counsel for the applicant submits that from the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., it is clear that the applicant is the cousin of the victim. She has admitted that she is aged about 25 years and was talking to the applicant for last four years. It is alleged that the applicant entered into physical relationship with the victim on false promise of marriage. She has also made allegation against another co-accused, Shamshad, of committing the alleged offence against her. Counsel for the applicant also submits that the implication has been made only to falsely implicate the applicant to pressurize him to marry the victim, since she is aged about 25 years now and yet not been married. Another person has also been falsely implicated in this case. No commission of offence of rape was found in the medical report of the victim. Even otherwise the FIR was delayed by one month. The applicant has criminal history of one case which is also with regard to the same informant. He is in jail since

24.10.2023. Final report has been submitted. On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant, Hanif, involved in Case Crime No. 236 of 2023, under Sections-376, 342, 506 IPC, Police Station-Asmoli, District-Sambhal, be released on bail on his 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.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 30.11.2023 Rohit High Court of Judicature at Allahabad