Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NADEEM versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Nadeem v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 13108 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 2632 (9 September 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Reserved

Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 13108 of 2005

Nadeem ...Vs....... State of U.P.

....................

Hon'ble Ravindra Singh, J.

Heard V.P. Srivastava learned counsel for the applicant,learned A.G.A. and Sri V.M. Zaidi and SriS.M.N. Abbas Abedi learnec counsel for the complainant.

This application is filed by the applicant  with a prayer that the applicant may be released on bail in case Crime no. 53 of 2005, under Sections  363, 366, 376, 504 and 506 , I.P.C. P.S.  Bhojpur, District Ghaziabad.

From the perusal of the record it appears  that in the present case the F.I.R. was lodged by  one Shafeeq  the father of the prosecutrix  at P.S. Bhojpur district Ghaziabad on 21.5.2005 at 9.30 p.m. against the applicant and three accused persons in respect of incident which had occurred on 15.5.2005 at 6.00 a.m. The distance of the police station was 12 km from the alleged place of occurrence.

It is contended by the leaned counsel for the applicant that in the present case te F.I.R. was lodged by the father of the prosecutrix Km Bhoori on 21.5.2005 at  9.30 p.m. which is delayed by 6 days. There is no plausible explanation of delay in lodging the F.I.R. It is further contended that the prosecutrix was consenting party. She wanted  to marry with the applicant. It was known to the first informant and others also. Therefore, the F.I.R. was not promptly lodged , but subsequently, the F.I.R. was lodged on the information given by Mohd. Hasan the Pradhan of the village, which is after thought.

According to medical examination report the age of the prosecutrix is about 17 years. She did not receive any injury. The hymen was old torn. Sex and sexual character are well developed. No definite opinion about rape could be given and in the present case during investigation the case was converted  by the I.O. Under Section 504 and 506 I.P.C. It is further contended that the applicant and the prosecutrix were arrested by the police. She moved freely with the applicant from one place to other place without making any protest. It is contended that after  recovery of the prosecutrix her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr. P. C.  in which she has given a changed version  and it was said that the rape was committed with her by the applicant and other co-accused persons on the point of pistol, but she stated that the applicant  wanted to marry with her and she forcefully taken away by the applicant and other co-accused persons.

It is opposed by the learned A.G.A. by submitting that even according to medical examination report  the age of the prosecutrix  is about 17 years. She was taken away by force by the applicant and other co-accused persons and at the pistol point and  rape was committed with her. The age of the prosecutrix is below 18 years. In such circumstances she cannot be consenting party. After performing the marriage the offence under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C. is clearly made out. The offence under Section 376 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant because the prosecutrix has clearly stated in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr. P. C.  that the rape committed with her by the applicant and other co-accused persons at the pistol point. It is further contended that in such matters the delay in lodging the F.I.R. is natural.

Considering all  the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A.  and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail.

Let the applicant Nadeem involved in case crime no. 53 of 2005, under Sections 363, 366, 376  I.P.C., P.S. Bhojpur, District Ghaziabad be enlarged on bail on their furnishing  a personal bonds and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Dated: 9.09.2005.

Rcv


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.