SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Abubakar vs State Of U.P. on 17 April, 2019


?Court No. – 41

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 14605 of 2018

Applicant :- Abubakar

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Shahroze Khan,Ganesh Shanker Srivastava

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The FIR of the alleged incident was lodged against driver of Tempo no. UP 55-T 6379 under section 354 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act. In FIR no allegation of rape was made. Thereafter the victim in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. has made allegation of rape against the driver of tempo. The applicant has not been apprehended on spot. His name came into light during investigation. During trial the statements of informant Jagdish and victim have been recorded as P.W. 1 and P.W. 2. P.W. 1 Jagdish is not eye witness of the alleged incident. In his cross-examination he has stated that his daughter has not told to him about the alleged incident. The victim (P.W. 2) in her statement has stated that the tempo driver has neither done any wrong nor committed rape upon her. She has been declared hostile. In her cross-examination she has stated that applicant has not committed the alleged offence. He has not committed rape upon her. It has further been submitted that victim (P.W. 2) in her statement has not supported the prosecution version and has not made any allegation against the applicant. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. There is no other cogent evidence against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 7.11.2017.

Per contra; learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

Let the applicant Abubakar involved in Case Crime No. 1848 of 2017, under section 376, 354 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Uska Bazar, District Siddharth Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

2. He shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and shall cooperate with the trial.

3. He shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

Order Date :- 17.4.2019




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation