Allahabad High Court
Gaurav Upadhyay vs State Of U.P. on 4 October, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189855
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9672 of 2023
Applicant :- Gaurav Upadhyay
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Srivastava,Gaurav Srivastav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Upadhyay
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Counter affidavit and supplementary affidavit filed today are taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashutosh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the informant and Sri D.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
4. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.50 of 2023, registered under Sections 498-A, 313, 323, 307, 354-Kha, 377, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station- Matsena, District Firozabad with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
5. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the informant as per Hindu Rites on 07.12.2020. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of dowry and there are allegations against co-accused person Manju Sharma of hitting her in her womb, thereby causing her miscarriage. There are allegations of unnatural offence against the applicant and the applicant is stated to have assaulted her by barging into her maternal home on 25.12.2022.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR itself is delayed by about four months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Already, there is an FIR No.180 of 2021 instituted against the informant at Police Station Kamla Nagar, Agra on 05.08.2021. The present FIR is a counterblast to the said FIR. Learned counsel has further stated that the mediation proceedings were initiated in the said FIR No.180 of 2021, which had ultimately failed. The allegations against the applicant were found false by the Investigating Officer as is indicative from annexure no.12 of the affidavit accompanying the anticipatory bail application, which is C.D. No.25 dated 12.06.2023, which categorically indicates that no offence under Sections 313, 354-Kha, 307 and 377 I.P.C. was made and only offence made out against the applicant and co-accused person Sushma Upadhyay was under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 of D.P. Act. But later on, on an application moved by the informant, the Circle Officer was pleased to transfer the investigation, as such Section 307 I.P.C. has been added, but no offence under Sections 313, 354-Kha and 377 I.P.C. has been found made out against the applicant.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the present case is a no injury case as no firearm injury is stated to have been sustained by the injured person and the role of firing has been assigned to co-accused person Rohit Sharma. The present case is misuse of dowry laws. 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 are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that all the efforts for mediation and reconciliation have already failed and the life of the informant stands ruined and she has a baby girl to look after.
9. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A., taking into consideration the fact that the mediation proceedings were taken up in FIR No.180 of 2021, and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
10. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Gaurav Upadhyay be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that 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;
(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
11. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
Order Date :- 4.10.2023
Ravi Kant
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
