Allahabad High Court
Shantnu Gaur vs State Of U.P. on 18 December, 2023
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:239091
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13775 of 2023
Applicant :- Shantnu Gaur
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shams Uz Zaman
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Shams Uz Zaman, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.749 of 2023 registered under Sections 376D, 328, 506 I.P.C. and 67 I.T. Act at Police Station- Baraut, District Baghpat with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have called the informant to his house on the pretext that he was ill and thereby the brother of the applicant Sadashiv Gaud is stated to have raped her and video recorded it in the camera fixed in the room. Later on, the said corporeal relationship is stated to have continued on the threat that the said video shall be made viral. Despite her continuing the relationship, the said video is stated to have been made viral by the applicant and other co-accused persons.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations are vague. The victim is major. There is no video on record and the same has not been taken into possession by the Investigating Officer. The offence made out against the co-accused person may fall within the category of Section 497 I.P.C. only, which is bailable although it has subsequently been quashed by the Apex Court.
6. 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. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. 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.
7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that there is a CCTV footage of the said act although the Investigating Officer has observed the fact that the victim was not in an inebriated state or unconscious state rather she was very much conscious at the time of said coitus.
8. 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 the victim is major and the victim seems to be a consenting party, 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.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Shantnu Gaur 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.
10. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
Order Date :- 18.12.2023
Ravi Kant
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
