Allahabad High Court
Vishal Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 27 May, 2024
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:95382
Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4333 of 2024
Applicant :- Vishal Yadav
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- K.S. Ojha,Shubhita Ojha
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today in the Court, the same is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri K.S. Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
3. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.403 of 2023, under Sections 376, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 67 of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, P.S.- Phoolpur, District- Prayagraj.
4. As per allegation made in the FIR, the applicant often forcibly committed rape upon the victim from the last two years when the victim was minor and the applicant still continuously sexualizing the victim and co-accused Kalpana Yadav fully supported the applicant in causing this offensive act but the victim never told the incident to anyone due to fear of respect in society. It is alleged that when marriage of the victim was fixed with Suresh Yadav then the applicant sent an obscene video of sexualizing to the Rakesh Kumar Yadav (younger brother of Suresh Yadav) and threatened Rakesh Kumar Yadav and his family members for dire consequences and due to this reason, marriage of the victim was cancelled.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The FIR was lodged on 26.12.2023 whereas date of incident is not mentioned in the present case. He submits that as per statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., there is no such allegation as alleged in the impugned FIR, is against the applicant, therefore, no offence is made out against the applicant as alleged in the impugned FIR. He submits that earlier, the applicant has approached before this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No.1726 of 2024 and the same was disposed of vide order dated 12.3.2024 with a direction to the applicant to move anticipatory bail application before the court below and the court below will dispose of the anticipatory bail application, if filed, in accordance with law. He further submits that co-accused Kalpana Yadav has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 19.4.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.3860 of 2024. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. He further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the trial.
6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant but could not dispute the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
7. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
8. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant- Vishal Yadav, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation.
(ii) 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(iv) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(v) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.
(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
(vii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
9. In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
10. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial, expeditiously, in accordance with law, within a period of six months from today.
11. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands allowed.
Order Date :- 27.5.2024 // Krishna*/A
