The Allahabad High Court has granted conditional bail to a man accused of entering a house and raping a woman and the niece of the informant at knife-point.
A single-judge bench of Justice Krishan Pahal passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Kuldeep.
Applicant seeks bail in Case under Sections 452, 328, 376, 354(Kha), 323, 504, 506 I.P.C, 3/4 & 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahr, during the pendency of trial.
In the absence of the informant, the applicant is stated to have barged into his house at about 5:00 p.m on 9.5.2024 and started hurling abuses at the wife, sister and niece of the informant and forcibly asked them to consume liquor by showing them a knife.
The applicant is stated to have beaten them up and committed rape with the sister of the informant after forcing her to disrobe herself and had also disrobed his niece and had outraged her modesty. The age of the sister and niece of the informant are stated to be 18 years and 16 years, respectively. The niece of the informant is stated to have been rendered unconscious.
The counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. The FIR is delayed by about eight days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim one, sister of the informant, has got her medical examination conducted and no injury has been found on her body whatsoever. The other victim, niece of the informant, has refused her medical examination.
Counsel for the applicant further submitted that there is no evidence whatsoever against the applicant of having administered some noxious material to the victims or wife of the informant. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained as in the said case the closure report has been filed and the same has been accepted.
Counsel for the applicant also submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.5.2024 and is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
The bail application has been opposed on the ground that victims are minors, especially the niece of the informant was 17 years at the time of her medical examination, as such the applicant is not entitled for bail.
The Court observed,
The well-known principle of “Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty,” gives rise to the concept of bail as a rule and imprisonment as an exception.
A person’s right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because the person is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt.
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no one’s life or personal liberty may be taken away unless the procedure established by law is followed, and the procedure must be just and reasonable. The said principle has been recapitulated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.
The State Law Officer could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.
It is a settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by the State Law Officer.
“Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of FIR coupled with the fact that the medical report does not support the prosecution story, 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 Court further observed while allowing the bail application.
The Court ordered,
Let the applicant Kuldeep involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.
The post appeared first on .
A single-judge bench of Justice Krishan Pahal passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Kuldeep.
Applicant seeks bail in Case under Sections 452, 328, 376, 354(Kha), 323, 504, 506 I.P.C, 3/4 & 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahr, during the pendency of trial.
In the absence of the informant, the applicant is stated to have barged into his house at about 5:00 p.m on 9.5.2024 and started hurling abuses at the wife, sister and niece of the informant and forcibly asked them to consume liquor by showing them a knife.
The applicant is stated to have beaten them up and committed rape with the sister of the informant after forcing her to disrobe herself and had also disrobed his niece and had outraged her modesty. The age of the sister and niece of the informant are stated to be 18 years and 16 years, respectively. The niece of the informant is stated to have been rendered unconscious.
The counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. The FIR is delayed by about eight days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim one, sister of the informant, has got her medical examination conducted and no injury has been found on her body whatsoever. The other victim, niece of the informant, has refused her medical examination.
Counsel for the applicant further submitted that there is no evidence whatsoever against the applicant of having administered some noxious material to the victims or wife of the informant. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained as in the said case the closure report has been filed and the same has been accepted.
Counsel for the applicant also submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.5.2024 and is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
The bail application has been opposed on the ground that victims are minors, especially the niece of the informant was 17 years at the time of her medical examination, as such the applicant is not entitled for bail.
The Court observed,
The well-known principle of “Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty,” gives rise to the concept of bail as a rule and imprisonment as an exception.
A person’s right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because the person is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt.
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no one’s life or personal liberty may be taken away unless the procedure established by law is followed, and the procedure must be just and reasonable. The said principle has been recapitulated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.
The State Law Officer could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.
It is a settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by the State Law Officer.
“Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of FIR coupled with the fact that the medical report does not support the prosecution story, 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 Court further observed while allowing the bail application.
The Court ordered,
Let the applicant Kuldeep involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.
The post appeared first on .