The Allahabad High Court while rejecting a bail application said that two youths passing lewd remarks at a girl going home and trying to force her to sit on a bike is against the principle of a fearless society and good governance of law.
A Single Bench of Justice Mayank Kumar Jain passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Safi @ Sabi.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case under Sections 352, 74, 87, 2 (5) of B.N.S 2023, Police Station Quarsi, District Aligarh, during the pendency of trial.
There are allegations in the FIR that the informant/victim was going to her home on 19.7.2024 at around 9:00 pm. Two people riding on a motorcycle came from behind. One of them abused her and said that she was looking very beautiful.
Then the other person said what are you looking at, pick her up. Then the person sitting behind lifted her in his lap with bad intentions and tried to make her sit on the motorcycle to take her away. She screamed loudly.
The brother of the informant Atul, who was coming to pick her and witness Bharat Singh, with the help of other persons, caught one of the youths on the spot. He told his name as Tabish and further told the name of his companion as Sabi (present applicant), who ran away from the spot.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Tabish at the time of his arrest made by the public. The applicant was not arrested from the spot. As per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, the applicant was driving the Bike, while co-accused Tabish was sitting behind. The victim refused to undergo her external and internal medical examination. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 20.7.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial.
Per contra, Vijay Kumar and S K Ojha, AGAs for the State vehemently opposed the bail application of the applicant and submitted that the applicant was driving the motorcycle at the time of occurrence. Co-accused Tabish was sitting behind the applicant. As per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, the applicant asked Tabish to pick her up. Thereafter, the other co-accused Tabish lifted her in his lap and tried to make her sit on the motorcycle to take her away with bad intentions. Therefore, the applicant was actively involved in the incident.
The Court noted that,
On the basis of the contents of the FIR and considering the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS, it transpires that the applicant was actively involved in the incident. The applicant cannot claim liberty of bail merely on the ground that he was not apprehended at the spot along with other co-accused and the victim had refused to undergo her medical examination.
It is an admitted fact that the applicant was driving the motorcycle and other co-accused Tabish was sitting behind him at the time of occurrence. Both of them, after seeing the informant on the road, abused her and made indecent comments. The applicant asked the other co-accused Tabish to lift her up. During her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, the victim has specifically stated that she can identify the person who fled away from the spot since he had tattoos on her neck and arms.
“Such incidents are absolutely against the objective of a fearless Society and good governance of law. If the victim’s brother and other people had not heard her cries and reached the spot to help her, the possibility of another incident taking place that brings shame to humanity and our Society cannot be ruled out. Considering the present scenario, this Court finds that the act committed by the applicant along with other co-accused, is of serious nature.
In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, nature of evidence available on record, nature and gravity of offence as well as the manner of commission of crime, I do not find it to be a fit case of granting bail to the applicant”, the Court observed while rejecting the bail application.