Allahabad High Court
Shivang Prakash Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 2 February, 2023
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 243 of 2023
Applicant :- Shivang Prakash Singh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sukh Deo Singh,Paritosh Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- GA, S.N. Sinha
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.FIR No.0135 of 2022 under sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Thakurganj, district Lucknow.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as also Mr. S.N. Sinha, Advocate who has filed vakalaltnama today in court on behalf of respondent No.2 which is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per first information report lodged by respondent No.2, it is alleged that for the last two years, she was living with the applicant and the applicant established illegal relationship with her on the pretext of marriage. Twice she became pregnant which was forcibly aborted. On 19.2.2022, the marriage of the applicant was solemnised with the informant in Arya Samaj Mandir, Lucknow. However, when she reached her matrimonial house at Prayagraj, her father in law, sister in law, Jeeja and and Jeth did not permit her to enter the house and ousted her by beating her. It is also alleged that the applicant also started beating her after marriage and threatened her to kill. Thereafter, on couple of other occasions, she was beaten by her in laws. It is further alleged that she is pregnant with Shivang Prakash Singh with four years old fetus. It is alleged that she is being harassed by Shivang and he is not giving food to her and she is forced to live at Railway station Charbagh and Prayagraj. Her in-laws are not permitting her to enter into house.
It is submitted that admittedly, the love marriage of the applicant with respondent No.2 was solemnised in Arya Samaj Mandir as per Hindu rites and rituals. By making general and sweeping allegations, all the family members of the applicant and even distant relatives have been made accused. He submits that the applicant has no criminal history. He cannot be held responsible to the notice issued under section 41-A CrPC as he was not residing at that point in time at the place of the notice having been sent, however, learned counsel states that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and as and when the applicant is required, he shall report to the police station.
Learned counsel submits that that story in the first information report that the prosecutrix is forced to live at Prayagraj and Charbagh Railway Station is apparently false. The father of the informant is employed in Secretariat, Lucknow and he has his own independent house, which prima facie shows that the allegations in the first information report are frivolous.
Learned Addl. Government Advocate and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer made by the applicant's counsel and they have stated that the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation
Considering the above aspects of the matter, father of the informant is employed in Civil Secretarial, Lucknow, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, the fact that the matter relates to matrimonial dispute, perusal of the record, as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Till filing of the police report, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O. /S.H.O. concerned.
The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer /I.O./ S.H.O. concerned call (s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.
In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this protection.
The application is allowed.
Order Date :- 2.2.2023
kkb/
