State Of U.P. vs Ahsan
2024 Latest Caselaw 15291 ALL

Allahabad High Court

State Of U.P. vs Ahsan on 2 May, 2024

Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:79174
 
Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 148 of 2021
 

 
Applicant :- State of U.P.
 
Opposite Party :- Ahsan
 
Counsel for Applicant :- A.G.A.
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Dileep Kumar
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
 

1. This bail cancellation application was filed by State of U.P. on 25.03.2021.

2. The accused was granted bail by learned Trial Court vide an order dated 15.12.2020 in a case arising out of Case Crime No.443 of 2020, under Sections 366, 376, 386, 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Premnagar, District - Jhansi.

3. Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for State refers following relevant paragraphs of this application :-

"9. That the learned court below has erroneously and wrongly held that the F.I.R. has been lodged after 26 hours without any satisfactory reason. While as a matter of fact, the learned court below failed to consider the correct aspect of the matter that if wife of a person is missed, then it is natural that the said person will search her and it may consume some time. When the informant did not find his wife, then he went to lodge first information report. Thus, the learned court below has committed gross error of law as well as fact while granting bail to the accused opposite party.

10. That the learned court below has committed gross error of fact while ignoring the statement of the victim recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. in which she stated that the accused had extended threat to the victim for killing her kids and as such, under the threat she had done everything as directed by the accused.

11. That the learned court below has again committed gross error of fact and law while did not consider the statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she clearly stated that the accused had given threat to the victim that if she does not do according to his wish he will kill her kids. He has extended pressure to marry with him and on refusal he forcibly committed rape upon her.

12. That the learned Court Below has failed to consider that the accused has committed heinous crime, but on the basis of flimsy ground has granted bail to the accused and as such, the bail order granted by the court below liable to be cancelled/set aside."

4. This application was filed in the year 2021, however, present status of trial is not on record i.e. whether statement of victim has been recorded or not.

5. Counsel for accused is not present, however, in counter affidavit, a compromise deed has been placed on record wherein accused and victim have entered into compromise though at this stage, the Court is not entering into legality of that compromise.

6. I have considered the order whereby bail was granted to accused since it is assigned by reasons and it is not a case that there is any perversity or misrepresentation or law on bail has been ignored, therefore, in the light of judgment passed by Supreme Court in Himanshu Sharma vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 187, I do not find any reason to cancel the bail, however, it is directed that in case, statement of victim has still not recorded the learned Trial Court will record her statement, expeditiously preferably within period of three months from today.

7. Accordingly, application is disposed of with aforesaid observation.

8. Registrar (Compliance) to take steps.

Order Date :- 2.5.2024

P. Pandey