Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Shahan vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Annexe ... on 29 April, 2025
Author: Manish Mathur
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24535
Court No. - 13
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12380 of 2024
Applicant :- Mohd. Shahan
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Annexe Lko. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Shekhar Sinha,Akshat Sinha,Gaurav Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dr. Pooja Singh
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite parties no.1, 3 and 4- State as well as Ms. Pooja Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2(informant) and perused the record.
2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.193 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 61(2) BNS, Sections 16/17 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act and Section 3(2)V SC/ST Act, at Police Station Talkatora, District Lucknow.
3. As per contents of FIR, which has been lodged against unidentified person, the minor daughter of informant was allegedly enticed away.
4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him only on account of subsequent statement of victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS with only role assigned to applicant being of facilitating the voluntary escape of victim from her family for purposes of marrying the main co-accused Mohd. Asghar. It is submitted that there is no allegation levelled against the applicant with regard to any other sections except for Sections 16/17 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act which even otherwise would be subject matter of evidence during the course of trial. It is submitted that the recovery also was not from the applicant who is under incarceration since 14.09.2024 without any previous criminal history.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and learned counsel for informant have opposed the bail application with submission that the statement of victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS clearly corroborate the imputation of Sections 16/17 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act and would be directly relateable to sentencing of applicant. Learned Additional Government Advocate however admits that the applicant does not have any previous criminal history. It is also admitted that trial is only at the inception with applicant being under incarceration since 14.09.2024.
6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :-
"21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty."
"27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."
7. Considering submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material available on record, it appears that FIR has been lodged against unidentified persons and applicant's name has been nominated on the basis of statement of victim as being a abettor of the allegations with regard to enticement of minor daughter of informant. It is admitted that applicant is under incarceration since 14.09.2024 without any previous criminal history with main allegation being levelled against Mohd. Asghar. The aspect of applicability of Sections 16/17 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act would be subject matter of evidence during the course of trial which has not yet commenced.
8. Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and submission made in the bail application, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly since no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses has been alleged, prima facie, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
9. Accordingly bail application is allowed.
10. Let applicant, Mohd. Shahan involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she/he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/her counsel. In case of his/her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him/her in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 29.4.2025
Subodh/-
