Revision Not Likely To Be Decided Early Due To Pendency Of Backlog Cases: Allahabad HC Grants Bail To Lawyer Booked For Stalking Judge
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a lawyer booked for stalking a woman Judge in light of the fact that he had suffered almost 2 years of incarceration and the Revision was not likely to be decided early, due to pendency of backlog cases.
The High Court was considering a Criminal Revision preferred by the revisionist against the judgment of the Additional District and Sessions Judge in a criminal case registered against him under Sections 354, 354A(IV), 354-D and 509 I.P.C. By the impugned judgement, the trial court convicted the revisionist under sections 354, 354Ka(1)(IV), 354Gha and 509 I.P.C and awarded four years simple imprisonment under section 354 IPC.
The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra held, “Considering the rival submissions made by the parties and nature of offence and the quantum of punishment awarded and the fact that revisionist is in jail since 11.7.2023 and the revision is not likely to be decided early, due to pendency of backlog cases and without further commenting on the merits of the case this Court deems it fit to enlarge the accused-revisionist on bail during the pendency of this revision.”
Advocate Ajay Pandey represented the Revisionist while Additional Government Advocate represented the Respondent.
It was the case of the Revisionist that the informant/complainant is a judicial officer who was posted in District Court Hamirpur at the time of incident and accused revisionist is a practicing Advocate in the said court. An F.I.R. was lodged by the complainant under sections 354-C and 354-D I.P.C. against the revisionist with the allegation that the revisionist was hindering the privacy of the informant, passing sexual comments and staring at her every now and then when she was walking out of her chamber.
The Revisionist submitted that the prosecution version is exaggerated and there is no allegation against the revisionist for transmitting any undesirable audio SMS or whatsapp message to the informant or trying to chat her in private manner. The main allegation against the revisionist is that he was stalking the informant. The revisionist apologized to her on several occasions but it was misconstrued by the informant. It was further submitted that revisionist is a practicing lawyer and has undergone 2 years 2 months and 15 days imprisonment with remission as on date.
However, the AGA opposed the bail plea on the ground that the allegation against the revisionist is of misbehavior and stalking a judicial officer, who was posted in that district, where he was practicing.
The Bench took into consideration the nature of offence, the quantum of punishment awarded and the fact that revisionist is in jail since July 11, 2023 and the revision is not likely to be decided early due to pendency of backlog cases. In view of such aspects, the Bench ordered that the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs 50,000.
Cause Title: Mohd Haroon v. State of U.P [Neutral Citation 2024:AHC:177642]
Appearance:
Revisionist: Advocates Ajay Pandey,Amit Goel,Azad Khan,Deepak Pandey
Respondent: Additional Government Advocate
