The Supreme Court has granted bail to a lawyer accused of outraging his wife’s modesty and attempting religious conversion. The decision follows an appeal challenging a Gujarat High Court ruling, emphasizing a thorough examination of the case. The accused, facing allegations of converting his wife to Islam, secured bail with the apex court directing the Trial Court to impose appropriate terms and conditions.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: On 24th February, the Supreme Court of India has granted bail to a lawyer embroiled in a contentious case involving allegations of attempting to convert his wife to Islam and outraging her modesty. The bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan overturning previous judgments by lower courts that had denied the lawyer’s plea for bail.
The apex court’s decision came after a detailed examination of the criminal complaint lodged by the wife of the accused, which not only implicated the lawyer but also his entire family in the alleged offenses. The bench, after considering the intricacies of the case, concluded that the appellant deserved the opportunity for bail.
The directive from the bench was clear and unequivocal:
“Considering the facts of the case, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. For that purpose, the appellant shall be produced before the Trial Court within a period of one week from today. The Trial Court shall enlarge the appellant on bail on appropriate terms and conditions.”
This ruling was in response to an appeal against a decision made in September 2023 by the Gujarat High Court, which had upheld a trial court’s verdict to refuse bail to the appellant. The High Court’s refusal was grounded in the belief that there was a prima facie criminal case against the accused, who was also deemed with evidence if granted bail.
The allegations against the lawyer were severe, with the complainant, his wife, accusing him of not only attempting to forcibly convert her religion but also threatening to release an intimate video clip of them to the public. These accusations had initially led to a stringent stance against granting bail, with the High Court citing the serious nature of the charges and the potential risk of evidence tampering.
However, the Supreme Court’s decision to allow the appeal and grant bail marks a pivotal moment in the case, suggesting a different interpretation of the risks involved and the rights of the accused during the trial process.
The legal teams representing both sides in this case included notable advocates. For the accused, the team was comprised of Mohd Yasin, Shariq Nisar, Yashovardhan Oza, Md Tanvir, Bilal Kagzi, Suyash Tripathi, Yamin Bisht, and Anas Tanwir. Representing the Gujarat government were advocates Deepanwita Priyanka, Swati Ghildiyal, and Devyani Bhatt.
CASE TITLE: Bhurekhan @ Akramkhan Ganikhan Pathan vs State of Gujarat
[READ THE ORDER]
