Allahabad High Court
Umesh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home ... on 15 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. - 370 of 2023
Applicant :- Umesh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
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.997 of 2022 under sections 493, 323, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Shahar, district Hardoi.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
The allegation in the first information report is that two years ago, while the prosecutrix was ill, she went to district hospital, Hardoi for taking medicine. Then the doctor Umesh (present applicant) said that he is a doctor and started treating her. Later on, they developed relationship. It is further alleged that the accused applicant further said that his wife has passed away and if she wants, she can marry him. Physical relationship was made by the accused applicant with the complainant on the pretext of marrying her. This relationship kept on for two years and on one day, when she asked to marry, the applicant has declined.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that from admitted case of the prosecution, it is clear that the ingredients of section 493 I.P.C. are missing. The informant was well aware that she is not yet married to the applicant, therefore, no case for offence under section 493 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. The informant is a major lady. As per the case of the prosecution, the informant was a consenting party. Simply because at one stage, the marriage has been refused by the accused applicant, no offence can be made out against him. The allegations of assault and threatening levelled in the first information report are concocted. It is further submitted that it is a case of no injury. The applicant has no criminal antecedent.
Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation.
Learned Addl. Government Advocate opposed the applicant, however, it is not disputed that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and the investigation is going.List on
Considering the above aspects of the matter, perusal of the record, prima facie the ingredients of section 493 I.P.C. appear to be missing, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the investigation, 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 interim protection.
The application is allowed.
Order Date :- 15.2.2023/kkb/
