Allahabad High Court
Ranjeet Chauhan vs State Of U.P. on 17 March, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5046 of 2023
Applicant :- Ranjeet Chauhan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Shri Pavan Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.366 of 2022, under Sections 376(2), 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Haldharpur, District Mau, during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have entered into corporeal relationship with the victim on the false promise of marrying her, but later on he is stated to have refused to comply with the said promise of marriage as such the FIR was lodged by the informant.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is a consenting party and is aged about 22 years as such she is major. Learned counsel has further stated that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is nothing else but an in-verbatim version of the FIR. Learned counsel has placed much reliance on the judgments of Apex Court passed in case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, reported in 2019 (9) SCC 608 and Ansaar Mohammad vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 886, wherein it has been stated that entering into any kind of corporeal relationship with a person on the pretext of getting marriage cannot be termed as rape and has stated that as such no offence is made out against the applicant. 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 is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.12.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant- Ranjeet Chauhan involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii). The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected.
(v) 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.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
10. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 17.3.2023
Vikas
