Allahabad High Court
Gulfan vs State Of U.P. on 28 May, 2025
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91959
Court No. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45637 of 2024
Applicant :- Gulfan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anoj Kumar Mishra,Mohit Pathak,S.M.Faraz I. Kazmi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ravindra Kumar Pandey,Ashfaq Ahmed Ansari,Dharmendra Kumar Mishra,G.A.,Pardeep Kumar
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri I.Kazmi learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Dharmendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.
There are allegations in the First Information Report that applicant and four co-accused are vagabond type of person in the village, who have scant respect for the women.Applicant and co-accused, Rifaqat, have already been implicated earlier in the case of commission of offence rape. On 1.7.2015 in the absence of informant in his house, the applicant and co-accused entered into his house through roof and after terrorizing and abusing his wife committed offence of rape against her.She also received injuries and on her cries, neighbours came and thereafter applicant and co-accused persons ran away. Report of the informant was not lodged hence he filed application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. and then his First Information Report was lodged on the orders of the court.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. Earlier, the cousin of the applicant lodged a first information report against the informant and his brothers Case Crime No. 130 of 2015, under Sections 302, 201, 120B I.P.C. and Sections 25, 54, 59 of Arms Act, P.S. Kunjpura, District- Karnal (Haryana). During the course of investigation, the name of the informant and his real brothers were disclosed and charge-sheet was submitted against the informant. In counterblast to the said proceedings, the instant prosecution has been instituted against the applicant. After investigation, final report was submitted in favour the applicant on 24.12.2015. Thereafter, on the orders of the Circle Officer further investigation was directed. On 30.10.2016, again final report was submitted in favour of the applicant. Thereafter, the protest petition was filed on 06.06.2017. The said petition was treated as complaint case and vide order dated 19.01.2018 complaint was dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. Against the order dated 19.01.2018, the informant preferred a revision before the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 17, Saharanpur. The said revision was allowed and the matter was remanded to the learned Magistrate to pass the fresh orders on 01.12.2018 Thereafter, the applicant has been summoned on 10.10.2023. It is contended that no such incident had occurred. The criminal history of one case of the applicant has been explained in para no. 23 of the affidavit
Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that all the co-accused have been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this court.The applicant is in jail since 21.11.2024.
Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that co-accused,Rifaquat has not been arrested till date. Applicant has avoided his arrest for long time,therefore, he does not deserves to be enlarged on bail.
On the other hand learned A.G.A has also opposed the prayer for bail.
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, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677. and 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,Gulfan , involved in Case Crime No.316 of 2015 (Case No. 4565 of 2024) , under Section-452,376D,323,504,506 IPC, Police Station- Gangoh, District- Saharanpur, 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.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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 in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) 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 in accordance with law.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 28.5.2025
Atul kr. sri.
