Allowed

Kapil @ Anmol Gulati v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Nov 2022ABAIL/10198/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to Kapil @ Anmol Gulati in a rape case. The court relied on Supreme Court precedents distinguishing consensual relationships from rape and applied the principle that absence of prior criminal history and cooperation support bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed with a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions including availability for interrogation and non-interference with witnesses.

Kapil @ Anmol Gulati Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10198 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Kapil @ Anmol Gulati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhakar Awasthi,Saurabh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arun Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Singh,learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶6

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 186 of 2021, under Sections 376, 313, 323 IPC, Police Station- Nawabganj, District- Kanpur Nagar, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have entered into a corporeal relationship with the first informant on the pretext of marrying her and is stated to have later on refused to do so and even is stated to have got her foetus aborted.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. There is no criminal history of the applicant. It is further stated that applicant is co-operating in the investigation and is ready to cooperate in future also. There is no likelihood of the applicant repeating the said offence, if any. 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.

¶9

Learned counsel has placed much reliance on the judgments of Apex Court passed in case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another reported in 2019 (9) SCC 608 and Ansaar Mohammad vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, reported in 2022 SCC

¶10

OnLine SC 886 , wherein it has been stated that entering into any kind of corporeal relationship with a person on the pretext of getting marriage cannot be termed as rape.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informnat have opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and has placed reliance on the rejection order passed by the court below, wherein it has been mentioned that the applicant is not co-operating in the investigation and N.B.W. has been issued against him, although they are unable to dispute the fact that applicant has no criminal history and that both the parties were living in relationship.

¶12

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-(2020) 5 SCC 1", the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶13

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed . In the event of arrest, let the accused-applicant Kapil @ Anmol Gulat i be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned/Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

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;

¶16

that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶17

that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶21

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial or deciding the regular bail application.

¶22

Order Date :- 14.11.2022 Shalini

¶23

Digitally signed by SHALINI JAISWAL Date: 2022.11.14 16:55:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kapil @ Anmol Gulati v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil @ Anmol Gulati v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neeraj Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Udhan Singh Saini and Another Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Agrawal Vs State of U.P.

Ajeet Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Satyawant Govind Rao Vs State of U.P.and Another

Rambabu and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.