Ravi Verma vs State Of U.P.
2022 Latest Caselaw 1575 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 12
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 104 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Ravi Verma
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anita,Gauri Suwan Pandey,Hasan Agha Jafri,Pankaj Gupta
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Pratap Singh,Naresh Kumar Pathak
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. Despite service of notice, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant to oppose the bail application.

2. The present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in FIR No.252 of 2019 under Sections 504, 506, 328 and 376 IPC, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Lucknow.

3. It is alleged that the prosecutrix was living in a rented accommodation in Lucknow to pursue Radiotherapy course from King Georges Medical University, Lucknow. She is a student of IInd year. On 10.02.2019, the prosecutrix got acquainted with the accused-applicant in a marriage. Friendship got strengthened by passing of time, and the accused-applicant started coming to the room of the prosecutrix. Thereafter, he got the prosecutrix entangled in his wave of love and said that he was in deep love with her and he would marry her. It is further said that on one day, the accused-applicant administered some psychotropic substance in cold drink and when the prosecutrix became semi unconscious, the accused-applicant established physical relations with her. He also committed unnatural sex with her. It is also alleged that when the prosecutrix told that she would lodge an FIR against him, he showed the video of the act, threatened the prosecutrix that if she would go to the police station, he would viral the video in social media and would destroy her life. On 03.06.2019 at around 7 P.M. the accused-applicant in 100 Rupee Stamp paper of "Vaivahik Ghoshana", forcibly made sign of the prosecutrix. When the prosecutrix tried to pressurize the accused-applicant for marriage, he switched off his mobile phone and did not come in her contact. The prosecutrix on 10.12.2019 went to his house, then his mother and father abused her in filthiest language and threatened her of dire consequences.

4. Mr.Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the prosecutrix is around 19-20 years of age, and the accused-applicant is also of the same age. They had consensual relations.

5. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant has placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Gulati vs State of Haryana : (2013) 7 SCC 675 to submit that unless the accused has intention to deceive the prosecutrix from very beginning, no offence is made out, if later on marriage does not get materialized.

Relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-

"20. Rape is the most morally and physically reprehensible crime in a society, as it is an assault on the body, mind and privacy of the victim. While a murderer destroys the physical frame of the victim, a rapist degrades and defiles the soul of a helpless female. Rape reduces a woman to an animal, as it shakes the very core of her life. By no means can a rape victim be called an accomplice. Rape leaves a permanent scar on the life of the victim, and therefore a rape victim is placed on a higher pedestal than an injured witness. Rape is a crime against the entire society and violates the human rights of the victim. Being the most hated crime, rape tantamounts to a serious blow to the supreme honour of a woman, and offends both, her esteem and dignity. It causes psychological and physical harm to the victim, leaving upon her indelible marks.

21. Consent may be express or implied, coerced or misguided, obtained willingly or through deceit. Consent is an act of reason, accompanied by deliberation, the mind weighing, as in a balance, the good and evil on each side. There is a clear distinction between rape and consensual sex and in a case like this, the court must very carefully examine whether the accused had actually wanted to marry the victim, or had mala fide motives, and had made a false promise to this effect only to satisfy his lust, as the latter falls within the ambit of cheating or deception. There is a distinction between the mere breach of a promise, and not fulfilling a false promise. Thus, the court must examine whether there was made, at an early stage a false promise of marriage by the accused; and whether the consent involved was given after wholly understanding the nature and consequences of sexual indulgence. There may be a case where the prosecutrix agrees to have sexual intercourse on account of her love and passion for the accused, and not solely on account of misrepresentation made to her by the accused, or where an accused on account of circumstances which he could not have foreseen, or which were beyond his control, was unable to marry her, despite having every intention to do so. Such cases must be treated differently. An accused can be convicted for rape only if the court reaches a conclusion that the intention of the accused was mala fide, and that he had clandestine motives.

............

24. Hence, it is evident that there must be adequate evidence to show that at the relevant time i.e. at the initial stage itself, the accused had no intention whatsoever, of keeping his promise to marry the victim. There may, of course, be circumstances, when a person having the best of intentions is unable to marry the victim owing to various unavoidable circumstances. The ?failure to keep a promise made with respect to a future uncertain date, due to reasons that are not very clear from the evidence available, does not always amount to misconception of fact. In order to come within the meaning of the term ?misconception of fact?, the fact must have an immediate relevance?. Section 90 IPC cannot be called into aid in such a situation, to pardon the act of a girl in entirety, and fasten criminal liability on the other, unless the court is assured of the fact that from the very beginning, the accused had never really intended to marry her."

6. From the facts as stated in the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., it can be easily deciphered that the accused-applicant and the prosecutrix has a long relationship. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant has also placed on record some photographs showing quite intimate relations between the victim and the accused-applicant. He, therefore, submits that the accused-applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

7. Mr.Ajay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the complainant was asked to find out from the prosecutrix whether she is willing to marry the accused-applicant or not? He tried his level best to persuade the prosecutrix to marry the accused-applicant but she blatantly refused to marry the accused-applicant. However, the accused-applicant is more than willing to marry the prosecutrix.

8. Considering the aforesaid facts and stand of the accused-applicant and the prosecutrix, and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

9. Let applicant Ravi Verma be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) 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 absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)

Order Date :- 27.4.2022

prateek