High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:151829 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29367 of 2023 Applicant :- Furkan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Malviya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Adarsh Singh,Indra Raj Singh Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Malviya, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Adarsh Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant. 2. Perused the record. 3. This application for bail has been filed by applicant Furkan seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 118 of 2023, under Sections 376, 313, 506 IPC, Police Station Mohammadabad Gohana, District Mau during the pendency of trial. 4. Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 12.3.2023, a delayed F.I.R. dated 3.4.2023 was
Facts
lodged by first informant Tarannum Nisha (mother of the prosecutrix) and was registered as Case Crime No. 118 of 2023, under Sections 376, 313, 506 IPC, Police Station Mohammadabad Gohana, District Mau. In the aforesaid F.I.R the applicant Furkan has been nominated as solitary named accused. 5. The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is to the effect that named accused i.e. applicant herein on the pretext of false promise of marriage has been deliberately and repeatedly dislodging the modesty of the prosecutrix since last two years. Ultimately applicant is alleged to have resiled from the promise of solemnizing marriage with the prosecutrix.
Legal Reasoning
prima facie the prosecutrix is a willing and consenting party, the medico-legal evidence does not support the ocular version of the incident, though it is alleged in the F.I.R. that applicant has repeatedly and continuously dislodged the modesty of the prosecutrix on false promise of marriage, prima facie the allegations made in the F.I.R. denote breach of promise of marriage, the delay in lodging the F.I.R., the clean antecedents of applicant, the period of incarceration undergone by the applicant, but without making any comments on the merits of the case the applicant has made out a case for bail. 11. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant Furkan involved in Case Crime No. 118 of 2023, under Sections 376, 313, 506 IPC, Police Station Mohammadabad Gohana, District Mau be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. ii. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. ix. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. x. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 28.7.2023 Aiman Digitally signed by :- AIMAN FAROOQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Arguments
6. Learned counsel for applicant contends that though the applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused inasmuch as the charge sheet has been submitted on 23.5.2023 yet he is liable to be enlarged on bail. The prosecutrix is major and she is a willing and consenting party. The last occurrence mentioned in the F.I.R. has occurred in the house of the prosecutrix hereself. As such no offence as complained of can be said to have been committed by the applicant. In support of his submission he has relied upon the following judgments of the Supreme Court:- (i) Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra and another (2019) 9 Supreme Court Cases 608 (ii) Maheshwar Tigga Vs. State of Jharkhand (2020) 10 Supreme Court Cases 108 (iii) Sonu @ Subhash Kumar Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anther (2021) SCC On Line SC 181 (iv) Mandar Deepak Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra and another in Criminal Appeal No. 442 of 2022 (v) Naim Ahmad Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine SC 89 7. On the above premise, he submits that from the perusal of F.I.R. giving rise to the present application the alleged act of the applicant falls in the category of breachof promise of marriae and not in the category of false promise of marriage. Referring to the judgment of Supreme Court in Mandar Deepak Pawar (supra), he submits that in view of above the applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. Even otherwise applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 18.5.2023. The police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. As such the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against the applicant stands crystallized. However no such circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial. To buttress his submission he has relied upon the judgment of Supreme Court in Sumit Subhash Chandra Gangwal and another Vs. State of Maharashtra and another 2023 Live Law SC 373(5). He, therefore, submits that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial. 8. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. and Mr. Adarsh Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. They submit that since applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused, therefore he does not derserve any indulgence by this Court. The prosecutrix is a young girl aged about 22 years whose modesty has been dislodged repeatedly and continuously by the applicant on the ground of false promise of marriage. They, therefore, contend that no sympathy be shown by this Court in favour of the applicant. However, they could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage. 9. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, Mr. Adarsh Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant and upon perusal of record, evidence, accusations made, complicity of accused, nature and gravity of offence and coupled with the fact that the prosecutrix is major,