Allahabad High Court
Jaskaran Verma vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 19 July, 2023
Bench: Subhash Vidyarthi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:48170
Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 236 of 2023
Applicant :- Jaskaran Verma
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Ojha
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
On 01.02.2023, after hearing the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. this Court had passed the following interim order -
"The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed by the applicant apprehending arrest in Case Crime No. 116 of 2022 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354Ka and 376D I.P.C., Police Station Sangrampur, District Amethi.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident is alleged to have been taken place on 15.6.2022 at about 7.00 p.m.. The allegation has been made in the F.I.R. against four accused persons, out of which Deepak Verma and Vinay Verma are real brothers and Bhaiya Ram Verma and Jaskaran Verma (present applicant) are also real brothers which means that all the four persons are part of one family which makes the incident highly improbable. The statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are contradictory. There is consistent improvement in the prosecution case right from the stage of First Information Report. In the medical report there is no external or internal injury. Section 376 D I.P.C. has been added on the basis of the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. There is no independent witness to the incident. It is the case of false implication due to old enmity. The enmity between the applicant and the informant has been reported by the Investigating Officer in the case diary, which is part of the record. It has been next submitted that Vinay Verma co-accused has been enlarged on regular bail by coordinate Bench of this Court, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-9 to the application.
It is contended by the applicant that it is not in dispute that the co-accused are brothers and cousins and in the F.I.R. there is no allegation of rape against any of the accused by the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix is a married women. The applicant has no criminal antecedent. The investigation against the present applicant is going on. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation.
Issue notice to respondent No. 2 returnable at an early date.
Learned Addl. Government Advocate prays for and is allowed fifteen days' time to file counter affidavit.
List on 02.03.2023.
On due consideration to the argument advanced; perusal of the record; and contents of the First Information Report; the statement of prosecutrix under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.; the bail order of the co-accused Vinay Verma; and also considering 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 interim protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned.
The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. 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."
No counter affidavit has been filed nor anything has come to light, which may persuade this Court to take a view, different from the view taken while passing the aforesaid order, nor the learned A.G.A. has pointed out any violation of the consideration of interim anticipatory bail committed by the applicant..
In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the interim order dated 01.02.2023 is hereby made absolute and the application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid order.
(Subhash Vidyarthi J.)
Order Date :- 19.7.2023
A.Nigam
