Allahabad High Court
Mohd Mushtaq vs State Of U.P. on 2 May, 2024
Author: Ajay Bhanot
Bench: Ajay Bhanot
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:78699 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4712 of 2024 Applicant :- Mohd Mushtaq Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amzad Rza,Rajnish Sahai Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ganesh Shanker Srivastava Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Matter is taken up in the revised call.
By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 358 of 2023 at Police Station-Siddharth Nagar District-Siddharth Nagar under Sections 354, 376, 506 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 11.12.2023.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 11.01.2024.
The following arguments made by Shri Anil Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Rajnish Sahai Saxena, learned counsel and Mushir Khan, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Ganesh Shanker Srivastava learned counsel for the first informant and Shri Chandan Agrawal, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:
1.Delay in lodgement of the F.I.R. in the facts of this case is fatal to the prosecution case.
2. The applicant and the victim are distantly related. The applicant ordinarily resides in Qatar though he keeps coming back to the country.
3. The victim and the applicant became intimate over the years and had engaged in financial transactions.
4. The F.I.R. is the result of the relationship between the applicant and victim going awry and disputes arising in the financial transactions.
5. The applicant did not capture or circulate any indecent photographs or video of the victim. No such photographs were recovered from the applicant.
6. The victim in her statements under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that she looked comfortable in intimate videos with the applicant under the threat of blackmail. The victim has further asserted that she herself made the videos.
7. The victim was never confined or bound down in any manner. The victim was present at various public places and had every opportunity to raise an alarm. Her conduct shows that she was a consenting party.
8. Major inconsistencies in the statements of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C., as well as the recitals in the F.I.R. discredit the prosecution case.
9. Medical evidence to corroborate commission of rape by the applicant with the victim has not been produced by the prosecution.
10. Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence.
11. The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.
12. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to join the trial proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.
In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Mohd Mushtaq be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
Order Date :- 2.5.2024 Dhananjai