Allahabad High Court
Manish @ Guddu @ Siddharth vs State Of U.P. on 29 August, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:174124 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38004 of 2023 Applicant :- Manish @ Guddu @ Siddharth Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Bhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
1. Heard Sri Chandra Bhan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State-respondent.
2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 510 of 2023, under Sections 376, 452, 506 IPC, Police Station- Sardhana, District- Meerut, during pendency of the trial in the court below.
3. FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and according to the FIR, after entering in the house of the informant, who was married lady, applicant committed rape with her entire night.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that totally on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter and story narrated by the prosecutrix in the FIR as well as in her both the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. appears to be unconvincing.
5. He further submitted that although, in the instant bail application, applicant has taken a plea that due to enmity, he has been implicated in the present matter but from the statements of the prosecutrix recorded during investigation, it appears that she was consenting party and in any case, offence under Section 376 IPC is not made out against the applicant.
6. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and is in jail since 12.07.2023.
7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that prosecutrix in the FIR as well as in both the statements recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. made allegation of rape against the applicant but could not dispute the fact that admittedly prosecutrix is major and married lady and at this stage, it can not be ruled out that she was consenting party.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
9. Although, prosecutrix in the FIR as well as in the statements recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. made allegation of rape against the applicant but she is admittedly major and married lady and story narrated by her does not appear to be convincing.
10. Applicant is not having any criminal history and is in jail since July, 2023.
11. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.
13. Let the applicant- Manish @ Guddu @ Siddharth be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
14. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
15. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
Order Date :- 29.8.2023 / KK Patel