Sahibe Alam v. State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
Case Details
arising out of case crime no.303 of 2021, under sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/5 (1) U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordnance, 2020 and Section 3 (2) (v) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, police station - Jahangirabad, District - Barabanki. By impugned judgment and order dated learned trial court has convicted the appellant under section 376, 504, 506 IPC and sentenced for 10 years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.4,000/- fine for charge under section 376 IPC, 1 year rigorous imprisonment for charge under sentence 504 IPC and 3 year rigorous imprisonment for charge under section 506 IPC. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Pintoo Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and perused the record. According to the prosecution version the victim was carrying out Graduation studies from 'Ganga Devi Memorial Degree College' Deva, Barabanki. The accused used to tease her and engage in obscene conversation with her in the year 2019. She did not tell this fact to her family initially. One day he gave her a ride on his bike and committed bad act with her and prepared a video. Subsequently, he had been sexually exploiting her continuously by keeping her in fear that if she would not concede to his immoral demand, the video will be made viral. On 20.7.2021 at 10:00 PM he telephoned her and asked her to 2 CRLA No. 1998 of 2024 meet. When she met her he had threatened her to convert her religion and marry her. She refused his demand. On 13.8.2021 he came to her place by motorcycle and tried to drag her and assaulted her. Thereafter an FIR was lodged by the victim on 16.8.2021 at 15:54 hrs. The accused was arrested by police on 18.8.2021. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there are major contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under sections 161 and 164 CrPC. In medico legal examination of the victim her hymen was found torn. Doctor who appeared as PW-7 during trial stated that no definite opinion regarding rape can be given. There was no mark of injuries on person of the victim. There was no symptoms of recent sexual assault. In vaginal smear report of the prosecutrix no sperm was found. Appellant is not having any criminal antecedents. He is held in jail custody since 18.8.2021. The victim is an educated and grown up lady but she had lodged FIR after more than two years of the alleged incidents which allegedly occurred between 2019 to 2021. The appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. No video as alleged in prosecution version has surfaced during investigation or trial. Learned trial court acquitted the appellant for charges under section 323, Section (3) (2) (v) SC/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and under section 3(v) (1) U.P. Prohibition of unlawful conversion of religion Ordnance. The appellant has been held in jail custody for 4 years 4 months. The hearing of the appeal is not probable in near future due to huge docket in the Court. The appellant undertakes to abide by the Conditions in case he is granted liberty of bail. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for respondent vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that. The charges levied against the appellant are of serious nature. The victim has proved FIR version by her own evidence as well as evidence of witnesses Jitendra Kumar, Pavan Kumar, Shanno Devi, Sonu and Sudha Devi regarding allegations of giving assault, abusing and insulting the victim and threats given by the accused to her in their sworn testimony before the Court. Considering the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence and nature of allegations, nature of evidence adduced by the prosecution, the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and long incarceration of appellant for 4 years 4 months and keeping in view the fact that the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future due to huge backlog, without giving any definite opinion on the merits of the case, in my considered opinion, case for bail is made out. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court 3 CRLA No. 1998 of 2024 is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of this criminal appeal. Accordingly, I hereby direct the trial court/competent court to enlarge the appellant - Sahibe Alam on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing two sureties and a personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-
1. The appellant will cooperate in early disposal of appeal and no adjournment on insufficient grounds will be taken or prayed on his behalf.
2. Appellant or his counsel will be appearing on the dates fixed for hearing of appeal.
3. Appellant will desist from coming into contact with victim/ prosecutrix in any manner either physically, telephonically or through electronic modes as well as her family members during the pendency of appeal. On acceptance of the bail bonds and the personal bond, the court concerned shall transmit the photocopies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution or respondent no.2 will have opportunity to seek cancellation of bail granted to the appellant. As regards fine is concerned, 50% of the fine as awarded by the trial court is stayed and rest of the amount of 50% fine shall be deposited with the trial court by the appellant within two weeks from his actual release from prison, if the same has not been earlier deposited. (Order on Appeal) List the appeal for hearing in due course. December 16, 2025 (Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)
arising out of case crime no.303 of 2021, under sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/5 (1) U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordnance, 2020 and Section 3 (2) (v) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, police station - Jahangirabad, District - Barabanki. By impugned judgment and order dated learned trial court has convicted the appellant under section 376, 504, 506 IPC and sentenced for 10 years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.4,000/- fine for charge under section 376 IPC, 1 year rigorous imprisonment for charge under sentence 504 IPC and 3 year rigorous imprisonment for charge under section 506 IPC. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Pintoo Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and perused the record. According to the prosecution version the victim was carrying out Graduation studies from 'Ganga Devi Memorial Degree College' Deva, Barabanki. The accused used to tease her and engage in obscene conversation with her in the year 2019. She did not tell this fact to her family initially. One day he gave her a ride on his bike and committed bad act with her and prepared a video. Subsequently, he had been sexually exploiting her continuously by keeping her in fear that if she would not concede to his immoral demand, the video will be made viral. On 20.7.2021 at 10:00 PM he telephoned her and asked her to 2 CRLA No. 1998 of 2024 meet. When she met her he had threatened her to convert her religion and marry her. She refused his demand. On 13.8.2021 he came to her place by motorcycle and tried to drag her and assaulted her. Thereafter an FIR was lodged by the victim on 16.8.2021 at 15:54 hrs. The accused was arrested by police on 18.8.2021. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there are major contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under sections 161 and 164 CrPC. In medico legal examination of the victim her hymen was found torn. Doctor who appeared as PW-7 during trial stated that no definite opinion regarding rape can be given. There was no mark of injuries on person of the victim. There was no symptoms of recent sexual assault. In vaginal smear report of the prosecutrix no sperm was found. Appellant is not having any criminal antecedents. He is held in jail custody since 18.8.2021. The victim is an educated and grown up lady but she had lodged FIR after more than two years of the alleged incidents which allegedly occurred between 2019 to 2021. The appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. No video as alleged in prosecution version has surfaced during investigation or trial. Learned trial court acquitted the appellant for charges under section 323, Section (3) (2) (v) SC/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and under section 3(v) (1) U.P. Prohibition of unlawful conversion of religion Ordnance. The appellant has been held in jail custody for 4 years 4 months. The hearing of the appeal is not probable in near future due to huge docket in the Court. The appellant undertakes to abide by the Conditions in case he is granted liberty of bail. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for respondent vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that. The charges levied against the appellant are of serious nature. The victim has proved FIR version by her own evidence as well as evidence of witnesses Jitendra Kumar, Pavan Kumar, Shanno Devi, Sonu and Sudha Devi regarding allegations of giving assault, abusing and insulting the victim and threats given by the accused to her in their sworn testimony before the Court. Considering the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence and nature of allegations, nature of evidence adduced by the prosecution, the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and long incarceration of appellant for 4 years 4 months and keeping in view the fact that the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future due to huge backlog, without giving any definite opinion on the merits of the case, in my considered opinion, case for bail is made out. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court 3 CRLA No. 1998 of 2024 is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of this criminal appeal. Accordingly, I hereby direct the trial court/competent court to enlarge the appellant - Sahibe Alam on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing two sureties and a personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-
1. The appellant will cooperate in early disposal of appeal and no adjournment on insufficient grounds will be taken or prayed on his behalf.
2. Appellant or his counsel will be appearing on the dates fixed for hearing of appeal.
3. Appellant will desist from coming into contact with victim/ prosecutrix in any manner either physically, telephonically or through electronic modes as well as her family members during the pendency of appeal. On acceptance of the bail bonds and the personal bond, the court concerned shall transmit the photocopies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution or respondent no.2 will have opportunity to seek cancellation of bail granted to the appellant. As regards fine is concerned, 50% of the fine as awarded by the trial court is stayed and rest of the amount of 50% fine shall be deposited with the trial court by the appellant within two weeks from his actual release from prison, if the same has not been earlier deposited. (Order on Appeal) List the appeal for hearing in due course. December 16, 2025 (Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)