Dhananjay Kohli vs State Of U.P.
2021 Latest Caselaw 3093 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 73
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 388 of 2021
 
Applicant :- Dhananjay Kohli
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Vajpeyi,Praveen Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Atul Kumar
 

 
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Dhananjay Kohli, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 0313 of 2020, under Sections- 354-D(2), 366, 328, 376, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Saharanpur, during pendency of trial.

Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.

There is allegation in the FIR that the applicant used to follow daughter of informant and one day he administered some intoxicating material in hercold drink and made her obscene video and on the threat of making video viral, he committed rape on herwhich shenever disclosed. Later, sheinformed his wife about the incident. Theapplicant sentthe certificate of registration of marriage from his mobile on the whatsapp of hisdaughter. Thereafter, the applicant made repeated calls to him to send his daughter with him otherwise he willspread infamy against her and heryounger sister. Hence, FIR was lodged stating that the informant has apprehension to his life and property from the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submittedthat there is no allegation of abduction of the daughter of the informant in the FIR. Counsel for theapplicant has submittedthat thedaughter of the informant had married the applicant in Arya Samaj Mandir, prior to the lodging of FIR on 25.08.2020. Copy of the marriage registration certificate has been annexed as Annexure 2 to the affidavit. The age of thevictim has been claimed to be above 20 years at present and above 19 years at the time of her marriage. Copy of the order passed in Writ C No. 16485 of 2020 (Smt. Ritika Sharma and Another vs. State of U.p. and 3 Others) has been brought on record wherein by the order dated 04.11.2020 this court disposed of the petition of the petitioners with the direction to the Senior Superintendent of Police concerned to ensure that thelife and liberty of petitioners be protected.Counsel for the applicant lastly submitted that the applicant is willing to produce the daughter of the informant before the C.J.M., concerned for recording of her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., if directed by this Court.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. He has submitted that in view of seriousness of the allegations made against the applicant, he is not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear, anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that applicant will produce the girl, Ritika Sharma, before the C.J.M., concerned, within a period of three weeks. The C.J.M. concerned will record her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The applicant shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail for the period of three weeks initially and on compliance of this order, it shall be extended. On failure to comply this order, anticipatory bail granted to the applicant shall stand cancelled and the police shall be free to arrest the applicant.

In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail till cognizance is taken by the Court on the police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/ concerned Court with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required;

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

(v) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Govt. Advocate is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation, if pending, of the present case in accordance with law, expeditiously, independently without being prejudiced by any observations made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Court before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, if investigation is in progress, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

In case the victim, Ritika Sharma, expresses her willingness to live with the applicant in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., then the applicant, in case of his arrest, shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

1. The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

2. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

3. That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

4. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

5. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

6. The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

7. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

8. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

Order Date :- 2.3.2021

Rohit