The High Court granted bail to a lawyer accused of stalking and harassing a female judge, citing procedural delays and the backlog of cases. The court noted that the prolonged detention without trial violated principles of justice. The allegations against the lawyer have raised concerns about judicial safety. The case highlights systemic challenges in addressing sensitive legal matters promptly.
Prayagraj: In a notable legal decision, the Allahabad High Court has granted bail to Mohd Haroon, a lawyer convicted of stalking and harassing a judicial officer in Hamirpur district.
The court cited procedural delays and the backlog of cases as reasons for its decision while highlighting the importance of sensitivity in handling cases involving harassment of women, especially those in the judiciary.
The case, Mohd Haroon vs. State of U.P. (Criminal Revision No. 732 of 2024), stems from an incident reported in August 2022, when a female judicial officer accused Haroon, a practicing advocate at the same district court, of stalking and harassment.
The complainant alleged that Haroon invaded her privacy by making inappropriate comments, persistently staring at her, and engaging in conduct that constituted harassment under Sections 354, 354A(IV), 354-D, and 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Following an investigation, Haroon was convicted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) in Hamirpur on July 11, 2023. He received a four-year sentence of simple imprisonment under Section 354 IPC, along with concurrent sentences, and was fined a total of Rs.4,500.
Haroon appealed his conviction in the Additional District and Sessions Court (Fast Track Court), which upheld the CJM’s ruling in January 2024. Subsequently, he moved to the Allahabad High Court with a criminal revision plea.
Represented by advocates Ajay Pandey, Amit Goel, Azad Khan, and Deepak Pandey, Haroon argued that the allegations were exaggerated. His counsel contended that the primary accusation of stalking was misinterpreted and that Haroon had already apologized to the complainant.
They also pointed out that he had served over two years of his sentence and urged the court to grant bail, referencing legal precedents. The State’s counsel opposed the bail application, highlighting the seriousness of the charges and the victim’s role as a judicial officer.
However, the prosecution did not dispute that Haroon had already served more than half of his sentence.
Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, while granting bail, noted that Haroon had been in custody since July 2023 and had fulfilled a significant portion of his sentence.
The court stated,
“Considering the quantum of punishment, the pendency of the appeal backlog, and without commenting on the merits of the case, it is deemed fit to grant bail to the revisionist.”
The court also imposed strict conditions for bail to ensure compliance and prevent further incidents:
- Haroon must not attempt to contact or interfere with the complainant in any manner.
- He must cooperate with the ongoing legal proceedings and avoid seeking unnecessary adjournments.
- He is prohibited from engaging in any criminal activity following his release.
The High Court directed that Haroon’s criminal revision petition be scheduled for a final hearing in due course and emphasized that any breach of bail conditions could result in cancellation.