The Court rejected an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by Anand Tyagi accused in a gang rape case. The Court declined to interfere with the investigation, emphasizing the need for custodial interrogation and forensic analysis of electronic evidence.
Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13183 of 2021
Applicant :- Anand Tyagi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- Sachin Malik
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Shri Rajesh Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A and perused the record.
The instant application is being moved by the applicant namely invoking the powers of Section 438 Cr.P.C. that he has every reason to believe that he may be arrested on the accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence in connection with Case Crime no. 181 of 2021, under Sections 328, 376D, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Kithore, District- Meerut.
From the record, it is evident that the applicant has approached this Court straightway without getting his anticipatory bail rejected from the court of sessions.
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.
On 22.05.2021 there are two FIRs lodged having case crime no. 181 of 2021 and 182 of 2021, the informant of both these FIRs are Anshu Tyagi wife of Prabhat Tyagi and Smt. Anuradha wife of Pintu Tyagi. Contention raised by the counsel for the applicant that Smt. Anshu Tyagi was lodged the FIR against Vivek @ Pintu, Intezar and Anand Tyagi with the allegation that co-accused Vivek started ravishing the informant from 10.10.2020 and started blackmailing her and after showing some obscene and nude videos of the informant he has crossed all the limits when on 18.05.2021 he has accompanied the remaining two accused persons and committed gang rape with her.
Per contra Smt. Anuradha, wife of co-accused Pintu Tyagi has also lodged FIR against Nirdosh and Jitendra who are Jeth of Smt. Anshu Tyagi, the first informant of case crime no. 181 of 2021. The interval
of lo dging of both the FIRs are of two minutes. Both the FIR are of gang rape.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has shown the 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim Anshu Tyagi wife of Pintu Tyagi in which she has reiterated the version of the FIR and has levelled. The allegation of gang rape against all the accused persons.Learned A.G.A. has also submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made in the F.I.R., the applicants are not entitled for any relaxation from this Court.
The perusal of the FIR indicates that the applicant has tried to dismantle the life of the victim. The investigation is going on and it would not be proper for the Court to interfere in the same.
The Court feels that in order to have indepth probe into the matter
custodial interrogation is imperative coupled with the fact that the electronic gadget should be taken into custody and its forensic test is mandatory so as to surfaced the allegation of obscene videos and photographs. Thus, giving a panoramic view of the matter the Court is not inclined to exercise its powers in favour of the applicant, and thus the present anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 Abhishek Sri.
Digitally signed by Justice Rahul Chaturvedi Date: 2021.07.30 12:25:54 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant who is alleged to have committed offences including gang rape.
Whether the applicant's failure to seek rejection from the sessions court constitutes a legal error warranting intervention.
Whether custodial interrogation and forensic tests are necessary for the investigation of the facts in issue.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anand Tyagi
State of U.P.
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
