Sunday, November 3, 2024
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

Allahabad High Court stays order granting bail to former UP Minister Gayatri Prajapati

The counsel for the applicant has submitted that a woman had been administered some intoxicant and raped by the opposite party as well as others accused and obscene photos of the aforesaid victim had been clicked.

The Allahabad High Court has recently stayed a July 30, 2021 order granting bail in a cheating-extortion case against former Uttar Pradesh Cabinet minister Gayatri Prajapati by an MP/MLA Court in Lucknow.

A single-judge bench of Justice Rajeev Singh passed this order while hearing a Bail Application filed by the State Of Uttar Pradesh. The bail cancellation application has been filed with a prayer to cancel the bail granted to opposite party (Gayatri Prasad Prajapati) by Special Judge, MP MLA/Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow, order dated July 30, 2021 in Case under Sections 506, 386, 388, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Gomti Nagar Vistar, District Lucknow.

The counsel for the applicant has submitted that a woman had been administered some intoxicant and raped by the opposite party as well as others accused and obscene photos of the aforesaid victim had been clicked.

On the basis of the same, she was being blackmailed and forced to have sexual intercourse with the accused. The victim/prosecutrix filed a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before the Supreme Court, seeking registration of a FIR against the opposite party as his FIR was not being lodged because he was a minister in the Ruling Government.

The Supreme Court passed an order dated February 17, 2017 directing the concerned police station to register the FIR on the basis of complaint and further directed the Police to investigate into the matter and submit its report in a sealed cover within seven weeks from the date of order.

Thereafter, a case under Sections 376D, 376, 511, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Gautampalli, District Lucknow was lodged on February 18, 2017 against seven persons, namely, Gayatri Prasad Prajapati, Ashok Tiwari, Pintu Singh, Vikash Verma, Chandra Pal, Rupesh and Ashish Shukla.

The counsel for the applicant further submitted that the bail was granted to the opposite party by the Session Court on April 25, 2017 in the case and State of UP preferred an application for cancellation of Bail Application, which was allowed on May 26, 2017 and Bail Application was rejected by the Court, order dated December 14, 2017 and thereafter, second Bail Application was also moved before the Court, which is pending.

In the bail application, on the medical ground, bail application was allowed on September 3, 2020, which was assailed before the Supreme Court by way of a Criminal Appeal and bail order dated September 3, 2020 was set aside.

Counsel for the applicant has submitted that FIR under Sections 506, 386, 388, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station-Gomti Nagar Vistar, District Lucknow was lodged by one Brij Bhawan Chaubey, who was one of the Directors of the company of opposite party (Ex-Minister) on September 17, 2020 with the allegation of several transactions of huge money and also execution of sale deed as benami transaction.

During the course of investigation, statements of witnesses, namely, Prashant Singh Sengar, Angerj Singh, Atul Kumar Singh, Sarita Dwivedi (Deputy Manager, ICICI Bank, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow) and Kanhaiya Ji Ojha were recorded and charge-sheet was filed by the Investigating Officer, but the Session Court, at the time of passing the order, failed to consider the statement of the witnesses recorded, under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

He also submitted that the Session Court also observed that the prosecution has not placed any criminal history of the opposite party.

He further submitted that opposite party was having criminal history of seven cases, which is reads as under:-

(i) Case Crime No.537 of 2020, under Sections 386, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Gazipur, District Lucknow.

(ii) Case Crime No.29 of 2017, under Sections 504, 506, 376, 511, 376 D I.P.C., Police Station Gautampalli, District Lucknow.

(iii) Case Crime No.336 of 2017, under Sections 323, 406, 504, 506, 420 I.P.C., Police Station Gautampalli, District Lucknow.

(iv) Case Crime No.1330 of 2016, under Sections 504, 506, 354A, 364, 511, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow. (v) Case Crime No.417 of 2015, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420, 203, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.

(vi) Case Crime No.147 of 2017, under Sections 188 I.P.C. and Section 171 Representation of the People Act, Police Station Gauriganj, District Amethi.

(vii) Case Crime No.93 of 2017, under Section 188 I.P.C., Police Station Gauriganj, District Amethi.

The Court noted, “The Court below observed that the opposite party was in confinement since last 10 months and prosecution could not explain that how he was involved in crime and without giving any reasons i.e. (i) merely on the point that the prosecution has not placed any criminal history to the opposite party, (ii) he was in jail since March15, 2017 and in the case, he is in jail since last ten months, (iii) charge-sheet has already been filed and considering the confinement period.

It is evident that, in case the applicant was in jail since March 15, 2017 and FIR of the case was lodged on September 17, 2020, meaning thereby, he was having criminal history, but the fact was not considered by the court below, the Court said.

Matter requires consideration. Issue notice to opposite party No.2. Steps be taken within a week,” the Court ordered.

The Court has fixed the next hearing of the petition on November 16, 2021.

“Till the next date of listing, operation and implementation of the order dated July 30, 2021 passed by Special Judge, M.P. M.L.A./Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow by order dated July 30, 2021 in Case under Sections 506, 386, 388, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station-Gomti Nagar Vistar, District Lucknow, shall kept in abeyance,” the order reads.

spot_img

News Update