Allahabad High Court
Sujeet Maurya vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 17 July, 2023
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:46526
Court No. - 11
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13723 of 2022
Applicant :- Sujeet Maurya
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
2. The FIR in question was lodged initially under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act. In the FIR, it was alleged that when the victim went to the house of her aunt at Surat in the year 2019, she met with the applicant. It was also stated that they used to talk and thereafter they got married in a temple and living as a husband and wife. It was also alleged that thereafter, the demand of dowry was placed by all the family members and she was assaulted mentally and physically on account of non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry. Subsequently, in the statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., she stated that the applicant called the victim on a false pretext of marriage and committed the offence under Section 376 IPC and thereafter refused to marry. In the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., similar allegations were levelled that on the false pretext of marriage, the applicant entered into physical relationship with the victim and now refused the same. In view of the said statements, the applicant has been charge-sheeted under Section 376 IPC.
3. In view of the statements under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., initially, this Court had granted interim bail on the statement of the applicant that he would get the marriage registered and would convince his parents for marriage but since the prosecutrix belongs to another caste, the applicant could not get married. Thereafter, this Court vide order dated 03.02.2023 cancelled the interim bail and sent the applicant in jail.
4. The Counsel for the applicant places heavy reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs The State Of Maharashtra, (Criminal Appeal No.1165 of 2019 arising out of SLP (Crl) No.2712 of 2019, decided on 21.08.2019 to demonstrate that the allegation of false pretext of marriage do not have any leg to stand and cannot ipso facto invoking Section 376 IPC.
5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer by arguing that the applicant had failed to comply his undertaking that he would get the marriage registered with the victim and convince his parents and family members about their marriage, therefore, this Court has rightly cancelled the interim bail granted earlier and the applicant is not entitled for bail.
6. Considering the submissions made at the bar, the statements on record, false promise of marriage itself may not be a ground to invoke Section 376 IPC as clarified by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 08.10.2022 except for the period when he was on interim bail and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant Sujeet Maurya be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.323 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 376 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Kadipur, District Sultanpur on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;
(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and
(c) 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.
Order Date :- 17.7.2023
akverma
