Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
SURENDRA KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
BAIL/34514/2022
BAIL - RAPE - DELAY IN REPORTING - [The court granted bail to the accused in a rape case, considering the delay in reporting the incident, the lack of fresh injuries on the victim, and the accused's lack of criminal history.]
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was arrested for allegedly raping the victim after promising her a better job. The victim lodged a First Information Report (FIR) one and a half months after the incident. The applicant claimed that the victim was falsely implicating him and that he had also filed an FIR against her.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that the victim's medical report showed injuries but not fresh ones, and that the delay in reporting the incident could be due to the influence of the accused. The court also considered the accused's lack of criminal history and the overcrowding in jails.
Issues: Whether the accused should be granted bail in a rape case despite the delay in reporting the incident.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the accused had made out a case for bail, considering the nature of the offense, the evidence, the accused's complicity, the submissions of the parties, the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the recent judgment of the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I.
Final Decision: The court allowed the bail application and directed the accused to furnish a personal bond and two sureties.
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34514 of 2022
Applicant :- Surendra Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Birendra Singh Khokher,Ramesh Kumar
Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Diwan Saifullah Khan
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Birendra Singh Khokher and Ramesh
Kumar Pandey, learned counsels for the applicant;
Shri Diwan Saifullah Khan, learned counsel for the
informant and learned A.G.A.
The instant bail application has been filed on
behalf of the applicant, Surendra Kumar, with a
prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.
192 of 2022, under Sections 376,506 IPC Police
Station Loni, District- Ghaziabad, during pendency
of trial.
There is allegation against the applicant that he
has committed offence of rape and extended
threat to the victim after promise made to her to
provide better job.Learned counsel for the
applicant has submitted that applicant and victim
are well known to each other.Applicant called her
on mobile phone before the incident and also after
the incident and victim was talking to the
applicant as per call details collected by police.
The First Information Report was lodged after one
and half months of the incident.Learned counsel
for the applicant has further submitted that
applicant has also lodged First Information Report
under sections 384,388,389,420,406,120-B I.P.C.
against the victim.Thereafter, First Information
Report was lodged by victim. It is a case of false
implication. The applicant is in jail since
18.6.2022 and has no criminal history.
Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently
opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and
submitted that in the medical report of the victim
injury has been found but not fresh because after
one and half months no injury remains to be fresh.
Her First Information Report was lodged for delay
of one and half months because of influence of the
applicant.
Learned A.G.A. has also opposed the bail prayer of
the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid
facts.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence,
evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions
of the learned counsel for the parties, larger
mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of
India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the
case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and
another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and recent
judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in
the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed
in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6
times overcrowding in jails over and above their
capacity by the under trials and without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the Court is of the view that the applicant has
made out a case for bail. The bail application is
allowed.
Let the applicant be released on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each
in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court
concerned subject to following conditions. Further,
before issuing the release order, the sureties be
verified.
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing
the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial
sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal
activity or commission of any crime after being
released on bail.
4. That the applicant shall not, directly or
indirectly, make any 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 to any police officer;
5. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the
effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on
the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are
present in court. In case of default of this
condition, it shall be open for the trial court to
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
