Allahabad High Court
Pramod Kumar @ Manju Kasana vs State Of U.P. on 4 October, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189923
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10372 of 2023
Applicant :- Pramod Kumar @ Manju Kasana
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Bhajan Chaudhary,Vikrant Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Satish Kumar Tyagi
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Vikrant Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satish Kumar Tyagi, learned counsel for the informant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, 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.0015 of 2023, registered under Sections 354A, 354C, 327, 500 and 506 IPC and 67 Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 at Police Station- Teelamod, District Ghaziabad with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
5. As per prosecution story, the applicant, by impersonating himself to be one Manju Kasana, is stated to have called the daughter of the informant and stated her to have entered into corporeal relationship with a person of other religion and as such, is stated to have sent a video and threatened her to concede it to be her and even demanded extraneous favours from her on 04.01.2023.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by six days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is no video on record to suggest that it has been made viral on social media or has been sent to the informant. The allegations have been foisted on the applicant that the said video was sent by him and later on deleted, thus it can't be retrieved at all. 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. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained. 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.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the said mobile phones of the applicant and the victim have been taken into custody by the Investigating Officer and have been sent for forensic analysis and the forensic report is awaited, as such he is not entitled for anticipatory bail.
8. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. 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.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Pramod Kumar @ Manju Kasana 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.
10. 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.)
