Allahabad High Court
Sahbaz Ahmad @ Lallu vs State Of U.P. on 13 March, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
RESERVED ON 3.3.2023
DELIVERED ON 13.3.2023
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 686 of 2023
Applicant :- Sahbaz Ahmad @ Lallu
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Kumar Gupta,Subhash Chandra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Aditya,Sandeep Kumar Dubey,Shubham Dwivedi
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Ashok Kumar Mishra, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Rahul Kumar Gupta,learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Sandeep Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the informant; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Sahbaz Ahmad @ Lallu, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 119 of 2022, under Sections 498-A,504,506,376 IPC and section ¾ D.P. Act Police Station Jhusi, District- Prayagraj, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation regarding commission of offence of rape, harassment for dowry and committing offence of penetrative sexual assault of a minor women against the applicant.
As per F.I.R allegation, applicant is brother-in-law(Dewar) of the informant. The victim has alleged that applicant and other family members of her matrimonial home, which included her husband,mother-in-law and other brother-in-law and sister-in-law, used to torture her for not bringing car in dowry and used to demand gold finger ring etc., from her.There is allegation against the applicant that he used to keep evil eye on her and after entering into her room, he tried to disrobe her and used to beat her. He cut the left hand of the victim by blade on 7-8 places . On 16.2.2022 all the accused persons forcibly made her consumed Ala bleach due to which she became ill, being pregnant she suffered miscarriage. She called her husband on mobile phone, who works in Merchant Navy and members of her parental home also came .Thereafter she was admitted in hospital. For four days she was in I.C.U and was discharged on 20.2.2022.The family members of her matrimonial home requested her not to lodge First Information Report and assured her that they will not harass her but when she came back they again repeated the old behaviour. On 11.3.2022 she was thrown out from her matrimonial home by family members of her matrimonial home. Hence she lodged the First Information Report.
Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that doctor, who treated the victim, has stated before the investigating officer that she informed the doctor that she herself has consumed the Ala and was suffering from pain in chest.After initial treatment she was shifted to room no. 207 and went back on 20.2.2022.She was admitted on 16.2.2022.The staff of the hospital also stated that victim never informed them that she was made to swallow Ala by family members of her matrimonial home.Her sister-in-law(wife of her Dewar) stated that victim was not pregnant at the time of consumption of Ala. She stated that there was no demand of dowry made from the victim.The independent witnesses also stated before the investigating officer that victim swallowed Ala on her own and was not pregnant at that time. She had swallowed Ala by mistake and ,thereafter she was taken to the hospital by the family members of her matrimonial home.
Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that applicant has been implicated because of ulterior motives. The victim is not minor .She has claimed her age about 22 years in her statement before the police under section 161 Cr.P.c. and also in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. before the courtThe applicant is in jail since 28.10.2022 and has no criminal history.
Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that allegations against the applicant are very serious. Because of harassment meted out to victim she consumed Ala but was saved by the doctor.
Learned A.G.A. has also opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A are not able to reply the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant.
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 recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the 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 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.
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
4. That 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;
5. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.
6. 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his 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.
In case the trial has commenced, the trial court will conclude the same within a period one year as per section 309 Cr.P.C.
Order Date :- 13.3.2023
Atul kr. sri.
