Allahabad High Court
Trimohan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 August, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5954 of 2023
Applicant :- Trimohan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Shiromani Shukla,Anubhav Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amit Kumar Srivastava,Pradeep Kumar Sharma
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
4. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.107 of 2022, registered under Sections 342, 323, 324, 376, 504 and 506 IPC at Police Station- Meerganj, District Bareilly with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. by this Court vide order dated 22.08.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.5483 of 2022 and he has not misused the opportunity granted earlier and has co-operated during investigation and is ready to do so in trial also.
6. As per prosecution story, the applicant, who happens to be the brother-in-law of the victim, alongwith her husband is stated to have assaulted her on 02.04.2022 at about 6:00 PM and the applicant is even stated to have outraged her modesty, as such the FIR was instituted on 03.04.2022 at about 01:59 PM.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The weapons mentioned in the FIR are kicking, fists and danda. Learned counsel has further stated that the injury no.1 is incised wound which cannot be sustained by the said weapons. The injury report is of 02.04.2022 at about 9:50 PM and there is overwriting in the time. The said injury report has been prepared in connivance with the officials. Learned counsel has further stated that it is a matrimonial dispute between husband and wife and the applicant has been made a scapegoat. Subsequent to the lodging of the FIR, in the statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has escalated the prosecution story and has even levelled the allegations of rape against the applicant. The said allegations have been made after legal consultation.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the informant is hellbent in sending the applicant somehow or the other behind bars as she has also got instituted an FIR under Section 148-A I.P.C. and other sections at Rampur police station. The criminal history of four cases assigned to the applicant stands explained. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
9. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that in the present non-permissive society, it is but natural that a women would not dare to level the allegations of rape against a person and after much persuasion and thought over, the same allegations have been made.
10. Learned counsel for the informant has placed much reliance on the judgment of Apex Court passed in the case of Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai vs. State of Gujarat, (1983) 3 SCC 217, wherein the Apex Court has opined that in the current non permissive Indian society, no girl would foist a false case of sexual assault against any person to avoid being maligned in society. Learned counsel has further stated that the criminal history itself is a ground of rejection of the anticipatory bail. The applicant is not an innocent person.
11. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., taking into consideration the fact that there is a spurt in the implication of all the kith and kin of the groom to be involved in the criminal cases and also the fact that the applicant was granted anticipatory bail till the submission of report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. and also the fact that the applicant is not a previous convict, and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
12. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Trimohan be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). 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;
(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
13. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
Order Date :- 3.8.2023
Ravi Kant
