SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(UK) 658

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.
Shadab Hussain – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
First Bail Application No.1297of 2024
Decided on : 24-09-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. M.S. Pal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Kunwar Vikramaditya Shah, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. M.A. Khan, Mr. Nandan Arya, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINT
The court granted bail to the applicant under IPC Sections 376 and 506, emphasizing the need for conditions to protect the informant and ensure trial integrity.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 376 and 506 - Bail application - Applicant in judicial custody for alleged sexual assault and threats against informant - The court considered the nature of allegations, the relationship between the parties, and the time elapsed since the alleged incidents. (Paras 1-10)

(B) Bail - Conditions imposed - The applicant is to refrain from contacting the victim and tampering with evidence. (Paras 10-11)

Facts of the case:

The applicant allegedly sexually assaulted the informant, who was his employee and business partner, after spiking her drinks in 2017, with the FIR lodged in 2024.

Findings of Court:

The court found that the applicant may be released on bail subject to conditions to ensure the safety of the informant.

Issues: The main issues were the credibility of the allegations and the relationship dynamics between the applicant and the informant.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the bail decision is based on the nature of the allegations and the need to ensure the informant's safety.

Result: Bail application allowed.

JUDGMENT :

Ravindra Maithani, J.

Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No. 386 of 2024, under Section 376, 506 IPC, Police Station Patelnagar, District Dehradun. He has sought his release on bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, the informant started working in the office of the applicant in the year 2016. The applicant wanted to inappropriately touch the informant, to which, the informant had resisted. Subsequently, the FIR records that the informant invested money in the business of the applicant. FIR also records that in the year 2017, one day, the applicant spiked drinks of the informant, she was sexually assaulted and the applicant threatened her that, in case, it is revealed to anyone, he would made the videos viral. Thereafter, the applicant on multiple occasions established physical relations with the informant.

4. Learned Senior counsel for the applicant would submit that the victim was employee of the applicant since, 2016. They were business partners. Their relationship was friendly. The victim has raised false allegations against the applicant.

5. Learned State counsel would submit that witnesses have supported the prosecution case during investigation.

6. Learned counsel for the informant would submit that the applicant has exploited the informant, who was his employee. After lodging of the FIR, the threat was also extended to the informant, of which, a report was submitted by the informant to the police.

7. It is the stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the trial or in any other proceedings.

8. The applicant and the informant both are major. They continued working for many years. The first incident allegedly took place in the year 2017. FIR has been lodged in the year 2024.

9. Having considered, this Court is of the view that subject to certain conditions, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. The bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

    (i) The applicant or any of his relatives shall not make any contact with the victim, in any manner, whatsoever, either physically, electronically or by any other means.

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer and the applicant should not tamper with evidence.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top