Allahabad High Court
Haseen vs State Of U.P. on 9 January, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39864 of 2022
Applicant :- Haseen
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey,Brijesh Kumar Pandey,Mohd. Azam
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
List has been revised.
Heard Sri Chandra Prakash Pandey, Sri Mohd. Azam, learned counsels for the applicant and Sri Sujauddin, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri V.K. Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.41 of 2022 (Session Trial No.240 of 2022), under Sections 452, 376, 342 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Khajuriya, District Rampur, during the pendency of trial.
As per prosecution story, the applicant is said to have committed rape with the informant/victim on the pretext of marrying her later on.
Learned counsels for the applicant have stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is major and is aged about 19 years. The families of the applicant and the victim had agreed to marry the parties, but later on they are stated to have fallen apart. The victim is a consenting party. Learned counsel has further stated that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. does not indicate use of any force and also does not indicate any other offence being committed as against the FIR. 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 28.04.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant has further 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 married cannot be termed as rape.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application but have not disputed the fact that the marriage was agreed upon by the family members of the parties.
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- Haseen 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 commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected.
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, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 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 based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 9.1.2023
Ravi Kant
