High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:55951 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5603 of 2025 Applicant :- Narendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Syed Riyaz Askari Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised.
Legal Reasoning
2. Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Sanjay Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant and Mohd. Hasam holding brief of Sri Syed Riyaz Askari, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 155 of 2024, under Police Station - Sections 376, 452, 323, 506 of I.P.C., Bachharaon, District - Amroha, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 5. The applicant is stated to have befriend the victim and had taken Rs.2 lacs to invest in a plot and established physical relationship with her and had got her sign on some blank papers and stamp papers. 6. The applicant is again stated to have taken her to OYO hotel and again committed rape with her and had video graphed the said act and threatened her to make it viral on social media. 7. The victim got impregnated, as such, her pregnancy was terminated by the applicant by taking her to one Dr. Shabana. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT: 8. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. 9. The FIR is itself delayed. 10. The allegations are per se false. 11. The victim is major and is 28 years old. 12. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from the fact that she had gone to the OYO hotel and the manager of the said hotel has stated that victim had come to the hotel on her own and had left the hotel on the next day, as such, applicant is entitled for bail. Although, the victim has stated in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. that she was raped by the applicant at the hotel, but it is a clear cut case of consenting parties. 13. The statement of the said Dr. Shabana was recorded by the Investigating Officer and she has denied having terminated the pregnancy of the victim in the instant case. 14. Criminal history of three cases has been explained in the affidavit. 15. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. 16. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.06.2024 deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF INFORMANT/ STATE: 17. The bail application has been opposed on the ground that the applicant has annexed false documents to the affidavit indicating the marriage between the two as it has not been signed by any witnesses and the said documents have no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. CONCLUSION: 18. 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. 19. 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 reiterated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690. 20. Reiterating the aforesaid view, the Supreme Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595, has again emphasized that the very well-settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment is not to be forgotten. It is high time that the Courts should recognize the principle that "bail is a rule and jail is an exception". 21. Learned AGA could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant. 22. It is 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 learned AGA. 23. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, taking into consideration the age of the victim and she seems to be a consenting party, at this stage, 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. 24. Let the applicant- Narendra Singh, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 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. 25. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 26. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 16.4.2025 Priya (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad