Gandham Anvesh Avinash vs The State Of A.P.,
2022 Latest Caselaw 5083 AP

     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

               CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5820 of 2022

ORDER:-

       This petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure

Code    (for   short   'Cr.P.C.')   seeking   pre   arrest   bail,   by   the

petitioner/A-1 in the event of his arrest in Crime No.318 of 2022 of

Old Guntur Police Station, Guntur District, registered for the

offences punishable under Sections 376, 417, 506 r/w 34 of the

Indian Penal Code, 1860.


2.     The case of the prosecution is that on 04.11.2021, the de

facto complainant lodged a report with the police wherein it is

stated that on 31.08.2021, her engagement was performed with

the petitioner herein and thereafter on 04.11.2021, the petitioner

brought cool drink and mixed an intoxicated drug in it and

committed rape against her will and videographed the same in his

mobile phone. Thereafter, the complainant and her relatives went

to the house of the petitioner and requested to perform their

marriage, but, the petitioner with the instigation of his family

members demanded Rs.50.00 lakhs towards dowry and car and

also threatened the complainant with dire consequences and

thereby cheated the complainant. Hence, the crime was registered

against the petitioner and shown him as A-1 in this case.


3.     Heard Sri. Raja Reddy Koneti, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri Soora Venkata Sainath, learned Special Assistant

Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration, contended

that the present case is foisted by the de facto complainant against

the petitioner. The petitioner did his Post Graduation in Dental

Medicine and working as Assistant Professor in a Medical College in

Rajamahendravaram. The de facto complainant is also a Dentist by

profession. He further contended that even if the allegations are

taken on its face value, they do not attract the ingredients of penal

provisions in the case on hand. The complainant herself stated that

there is love affair between the petitioner and herself and now the

complainant concocted a false story against the petitioner. He

further contended that betrothal ceremony was performed on

31.08.2021 as such, the allegation of rape and other allegations

are concocted against the petitioner. Hence, he prays to grant bail

to the petitioner.

5. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the

petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in case of Sonu alias Subhash Kumar vs. State of Uttar

Pradesh and Another1 and draw the attention of this Court at

Para No.4 which reads as under:

"Mr.Amit Pawan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, has relied upon a decision of this Court in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra reported in (2019) 9 SCC 608. Learned counsel submitted that the relationship between the appellant and the second respondent was consensual in nature. It has been urged that a bare reading of the FIR as well as the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C would indicate that there was absolutely no intent on the part of the appellant, when he entered upon the

2021 SCC Online SC 181 relationship, not to marry3the second respondent nor can it be even suggested that the promise to marry was false. Hence, it has been submitted that no offence has been made out within the meaning of Section 376 of IPC."

He further relied on a decision in case of Ansaar

Mohammad vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr in Criminal

Appeal No.962 of 2022 @ SLP (CRL.)No.5326 of 2022, it is held as

under:

"It is the admitted case of the complainant that she was in a relationship with the appellant for a period of four years. It is admitted by Mr.Himanshu Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/ complainant that when the relationship started, she was 21 years of age.

In view of the said fact, the complainant has willingly been staying with the appellant and had the relationship. Therefore, now if the relationship is not working out, the same cannot be a ground for lodging an FIR for the offence under Section 376(2)(n) IPC."

6. On the other hand, learned Special Assistant Public

Prosecutor opposed the petition and would contend that there are

allegations against the petitioner and if the petitioner released on

bail, he may not cooperate with the investigation. He has drawn

the attention of this Court to the language used in the compliant

and stated that there are allegations and prayed to dismiss the

application.

7. On perusal of the record and considering the submissions of

both the learned counsel and even the allegation against the

petitioner is taken into consideration, the de facto complainant

herself has stated that the petitioner brought two cool drink bottles

and after talking for sometime, he opened one bottle and gave it to

her and after consuming the same, she became unconscious and the petitioner committed rape4on her. Even that version also

clearly shows that the petitioner has not given already opened cool

drink bottle to her and even according to her, the cool drink bottle

has opened in her presence. There is inconsistency in the versions

of the de facto complainant. As the petitioner is doing his

profession and considering the judgments relied upon by learned

counsel for the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant pre arrest

bail to the petitioner, however, the apprehension of the learned

Special Assistant Public Prosecutor is taken care of by imposing

certain conditions.

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his

arrest in connection with Cr.No.318 of 2022 of Old Guntur Police

Station, Guntur District, on his executing self bond for Rs.25,000/-

(Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum

each to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer, Old Guntur

Police Station, Guntur Urban.

(ii) On such release, the petitioner shall report before the Station

House Officer, Old Guntur Police Station, Guntur Urban once in a

week i.e. on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon, till

filing of charge sheet.

(iii) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation;

(iv) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to tamper with the

prosecution evidence. He shall make himself available to the

investigating officer whenever required by them to facilitate proper

investigation in this case.

The petitioner shall scrupulously comply with the above

conditions and any infraction of the same will be viewed seriously

and it also entails cancellation of the bail and in such case

prosecution shall move appropriate application for such

cancellation.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

Date : 10.08.2022 KA

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5820 OF 2022

Date : 10.08.2022

KA