Allahabad High Court
Rakesh @ Bhola vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 6 August, 2022
Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5735 of 2022
Applicant :- Rakesh @ Bhola
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Agrahari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard.
Crl.M. Application No. 2 of 2022 has been moved for correction of the order dated 27.7.2022.
C.M. Application for correction is hereby allowed.
Order dated 27.7.2022 is hereby corrected.
Now the judgment and order dated 27.7.2022 stands corrected as follows :
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
By means of present anticipatory bail application, the applicant has shown his apprehension of arrest in Case Crime No. 512 of 2020 u/ s 323, 363, 504, 506 IPC, & section 8 POCSO Act P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence alleged in the F.I.R.
The attention has been drawn towards the F.I.R. where allegations have been leveled against the three accused persons including the applicant. Against the present applicant the allegation of kidnapping has been leveled. However, the prosecutrix whose age has been determined by the medical examination as 19-20 years has recorded her statement u/s 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she has stated that she is aged about 20 years and she is living with one Raju who happens to be the brother of the present applicant. She has further stated that she got married with Raju. It has been informed that from the aforesaid wedlock the prosecutrix and Raju have been blessed with baby girl. Attention has also been drawn towards anticipatory bail rejection order wherein the relevant fact was pleaded that no charge-sheet has been filed against the present applicant as no credible evidence has been found by the I.O. against the present applicant.
On being confronted the learned AGA as to whether the investigation against the present applicant is going on or not, learned AGA has informed that he could not receive specific instructions on that point.
Learned counsel has further submitted that even if any investigation is pending against the applicant, he shall cooperate with such investigation. If he is called by the court concerned, he shall appear before the court but in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case the liberty of the present applicant may be protected.
Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer of learned counsel for the applicant but could not dispute the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.
Without entering into the merits of the issue and considering the allegation of the F.I.R., statement of the prosecutrix recorded u/s 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., fact that the prosecutrix is living with brother of the applicant as wife and the undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate with the process of law, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicant may be protected till filing of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.
It is needless to say that the applicant shall cooperate with the investigation properly, failing which the protection being given by this order may not be available to him any further.
Therefore, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant- Rakesh @ Bhola shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2. 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 or tamper with the evidence;
3. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
4. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant;
5. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
In view of above, the present anticipatory bail application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.8.2022
Om.
