Ahmad Faraj @ Shahbaj v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51199 of 2023 Applicant :- Ahmad Faraj @ Shahbaj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Siddharth Srivastava,Deeksha Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Siddarth Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Avesh Khan, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.480 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Mubarakpur, District Azamgarh, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution case, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant in the night of 30.9.2023.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. The FIR is delayed by about eight days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Learned counsel has further stated that the victim is a consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., whereby she has stated that she had gone with the applicant out of her own sweet-will and had married him. No corporeal relationship has been established between them.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the victim herein is 17 years old and has placed much reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in Sushil Kumar vs. Rakesh Kumar, (2003) 8 SCC 673, wherein it has been stated that it is more often in the Indian Society that person shows the age of their wards much below than their actual age. In the case of Brij Mohan Singh vs. Priya Brat Narain Sinha, AIR 1965 SC 282, this Court, inter alia, observed that in actual life it often happens that persons give false age of the boy at the time of his admission to a school so that later in life he would have an advantage when seeking public service for which a minimum age for eligibility is often prescribed. It is also settled by Apex Court that as per the medical records, a leverage of two years may be granted to the accused person.

¶7Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.10.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶9Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, 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.

¶10Let the applicant-Ahmad Faraj @ Shahbaj, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 evidence.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶11In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶12It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 30.11.2023/ Vikas [Krishan Pahal, J.] High Court of Judicature at Allahabad