Allahabad High Court
Chand Mohammad vs State Of U.P. on 2 January, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39305 of 2022
Applicant :- Chand Mohammad
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arun Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Anand Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the first informant as well as Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 44 of 2022, under Section 376 I.P.C., Police Station Pathara Bazar, District Siddharth Nagar, during the pendency of trial.
As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have entered into corporeal relationship with the first informant for a period of one year on the pretext of marrying her. Later on, the applicant is stated to have refused to marry her.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated 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. Learned counsel has stated that the victim is a consenting party and as per the allegations, her age is 19 years and in the ossification test, the age of the victim has come up as 22 years. Several 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. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.7.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned counsel has placed much reliance on the judgments of Apex Court passed in case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another reported in 2019 (9) SCC 608 and Ansaar Mohammad vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 886, wherein it has been stated that entering into any kind of corporeal relationship with a person on the pretext of getting marriage cannot be termed as rape.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant have vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that applicant has no criminal history.
Considering 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.
Let the applicant- Chand Mohammad involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
5. 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 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.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
It 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 on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 2.1.2023
Shalini
