Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(All) 29751
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
AJAY KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
BAIL/48286/2022
A person is entitled to bail if there is no evidence that they committed the crime they are accused of, and if they have no criminal history.
Headnote:
BAIL - SECTION 354GA, 504, 506 IPC AND SECTION 67 OF I.T. ACT - SUMMARY
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was accused of making an obscene video of the victim and threatening her that the video would go viral. The applicant's counsel argued that the applicant was falsely implicated and that there was no evidence that the video was actually made or distributed.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no evidence that the applicant had actually made or distributed the video, and that the applicant had no criminal history. The court also noted that the applicant had been in jail for over three months.
Issues: Whether the applicant was falsely implicated.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the applicant was entitled to bail because there was no evidence that he had actually made or distributed the video, and because he had no criminal history.
Final Decision: The court allowed the applicant's bail application.
Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48286
of 2022
Applicant :- Ajay Kumar
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Awtar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Chaudhary
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
1. Heard Sri Mahaveer Yadav, Advocate, holding brief of Sri
Ram Awtar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashok
Kumar Chaudhary, learned counsel for the informant and Sri
S.B. Maurya, learned A.G.A.-I for the State.
2. The instant application has been moved on behalf of the
applicant to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 108 of
2022, under Sections 354Ga, 504, 506 IPC and Section 67 of
I.T. Act, Police Station Rudhauli, District Basti, during
pendency of the trial in the court concerned.
3. As per the allegation, applicant made obscene video of the
victim and threatened her that video would gone viral.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant
is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present
matter and although there is allegation that he prepared obscene
video of the victim but during investigation only mobile was
recovered and it is nowhere mentioned either in the recovery
memo or in the entire case diary that along with mobile obscene
video was also recovered. He next submitted that there is only
allegation of threatening that video would gone viral but there is
no evidence on record which can show that obscene video was
gone viral by the applicant. He next submitted that applicant is
having no criminal history and he undertakes that he will
remain present on each and every date fixed by the trial court.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the
informant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that
there is specific allegation against the applicant that when
victim was being raped by accused then he prepared her video
and threatened her that video would gone viral but learned
A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant could not
dispute the fact that during investigation the alleged video could
not be recovered and further no admissible evidence could be
collected by the Investigating Officer on the basis of which it
could be inferred that alleged video was gone viral and further
the applicant in the present matter is in jail since 13.9.2022 and
he is not having any criminal history.
6. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the
case. It appears that the allegation against the applicant is that
he prepared obscene video of the victim and threatened her that
video would gone viral but during investigation no evidence
could be collected by the Investigating Officer on the basis of
which it could be inferred that the alleged video was gone viral
by the applicant and further even during investigation no
recovery of the alleged video was made and only recovery of
mobile was made. Therefore, considering this fact and the fact
that applicant is languishing in jail since 13.9.2022, and he is
having no criminal history, in view of this Court, it is a fit case
that applicant may be enlarged on bail.
7. In the light of discussions made above, without expressing
any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail
application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant- Ajay Kumar 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.
(iv) The
