Vikas Khanna Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9464 of 2020

Applicant :- Vikas Khanna Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Krishna Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

Order on Criminal Misc. Exemption Application

¶7

This exemption application is allowed.

¶8

Order on Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application

¶9

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vikas Khanna , with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 1335 of 2020, under Sections328, 376 and 506 IPC, Police Station- Naini, DistrictPrayagraj, during pendency of trial.

¶10

Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.

¶11

There allegation against the applicant is that he was given contract for construction of house of the informant. On the fateful date, when the informant went to inspect the construction, she was subjected to rape by the applicant and also threatened that in case she makes complaint, her obscene video shall be made viral. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is a construction contractor. He has constructed the house of the informant and the total cost of construction came to Rs. 7,87,500/- out of which she made payment of only Rs. 3,46,000/-. Regarding the outstanding balance of Rs. 4,41,500/-, there was dispute and the applicant was demanding the same from the informant and

¶12

her husband. Instead of making payment of the amount, she has falsely implicated him in the present case only to prevent him from making demand of money. Counsel for the applicant has further pointed out that earlier the sister of the applicant had implicated one, Naseem Ahmad, regarding the same offence and on almost similar allegations. It is submitted that the informant has falsely implicated the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. He is aged about 55 years. He has definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time.

¶13

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant.

¶14

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 and order dated 22.05.2020 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2609 of 2020 . 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.

¶15

Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶16

The applicant shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶17

The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.

¶18

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;

¶19

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.

¶20

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the trial 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 .

¶21

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.

¶22

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶23

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶24

Order Date :- 17.12.2020 Rohit

Vikas Khanna v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Khanna v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Suleman Vs State of U.P.

Puran and Another Vs State of U.P.

Balli @ Rajendra Singh and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Chandrashekhar Yadav and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Shah Mohammad Khan @ Pammi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others