Allahabad High Court
Shyam Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 7 May, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:81224
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4508 of 2024
Applicant :- Shyam Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Gupta,Babit Kumar,Yadvendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Yadvendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashish Gupta, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant after filing of charge-sheet in Case Crime No.368 of 2022 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 354-Gha, 376, 452, 500, 506 and 120-B IPC at Police Station- Nai Mandi, District Muzaffarnagar with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, till conclusion of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have met the informant regarding purchase of a shop, whereby he is stated to have befriended her and entered into corporeal relationship with her on the pretext that he himself and the victim both were widowers and their spouses had expired. The applicant is stated to have started harassing her and had committed rape with her and even assaulted her on 15.05.2022 at about 10:30 a.m., whereby damaging her vertebral column.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed by two months of the said incident of injury and about several years of the said corporeal relationship established with consent. Learned counsel has placed much reliance on the judgments of Supreme Court passed in case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2019 (9) SCC 608 and Ansaar Mohammad vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 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 married cannot be termed as rape and has stated that as such no offence is made out against the applicant.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the applicant and the victim both are major and the victim herself has two offspring out of her earlier marriage. The applicant was granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 12.4.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S438 Cr.P.C. No.13504 of 2022 and the said anticipatory bail application was withdrawn by the applicant and dismissed as such on 19.02.2024 as the final report (charge-sheet) was submitted qua the applicant, as the prayer therein was made to grant anticipatory bail during investigation only. Thus, effectively this is the first anticipatory bail application.
7. 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.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application and has stated that the applicant is not cooperating with trail and has not cooperated with investigation also as subsequent to the filing of charge-sheet, at least five times summons have been issued to the applicant and he has not appeared in court. It is further argued that even the charge has not yet been framed.
9. Learned A.G.A. has also opposed the anticipatory bail application but could not dispute the fact that there is no injury report on record.
10. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, taking into consideration the aforesaid judgments of the Supreme Court coupled with the fact that there is no injury report to corroborate the prosecution story and the FIR is delayed, 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 theSupreme Court.
11. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Shyam Singh 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 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;
(ii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iii). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(iv). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(v). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
12. 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 :- 7.5.2024
Ravi Kant
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
