Allahabad High Court
Aas Mohammad Urf Abhi vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 December, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:240046
Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8892 of 2023
Appellant :- Aas Mohammad Urf Abhi
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Kumar Dhananjay
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Counter affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the informant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.
The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 21.07.2023 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Addl. Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad in S.S.T No. 1211 of 2022, arising out of the Case Crime No. 976 of 2021, under Sections 328, 376, 506 of IPC, and under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Modinagar, District Ghaziabad.
There is an allegation against the appellant in the F.I.R that on 05.08.2021, the appellant called the prosecutrix at Modinagar and had taken her to a hotel where he offered cold drink having some substance to the prosecutrix. As a result of it she become unconscious. Thereafter, he established physical relation with the prosecutrix. He took indecent photographs and created video clip of the prosecutrix. The appellant addressed the prosecutrix with caste related abuses and also threatened her.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The victim is major and she had already performed two marriages prior to the alleged incident, she was a consenting party. An application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C was moved on 06.10.2021 while the occurrence is said to had taken place on 05.08.2021 and no explanation is offered for such delay. It is also submitted that during trial, the victim was examined as a prosecution witness and in her cross examination she had admitted that she had performed nikah with the appellant. The statement of the victim has been recorded, therefore, there is no possibility of tampering the material witnesses of the prosecution. Criminal history of the appellant is explained in paragraph-3 of the supplementary affidavit. Appellant is languishing in jail since 29.03.2022. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. assisted by learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submitted that during her statement recorded before the court she had denied that she had performed nikah with the appellant.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, this Court is of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. 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.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.
Let appellant, Aas Mohammad Urf Abhi, involved in the above Case 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.
(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.
(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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 19.12.2023
PS
