Allowed

Yogesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC6 Oct 2023ABAIL/10880/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Yogesh Kumar, who was arrested under Sections 363 and 366 IPC. The court noted that the applicant married the victim voluntarily and she is one month and five days pregnant. He was released on a personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on anticipatory bail subject to a personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties and specific conditions to appear in court and not misuse liberty.

Yogesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193144

¶2

Court No. - 71

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10880 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vikrant Neeraj,Rajesh Chandra Jaiswal

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶7

In pursuance of order of this Court dated 04.10.2023, applicant- Yogesh Kumar and the victim- Kumkum are present before this Court and duly identified by counsel for the applicant. The parties have filed joint affidavit, the same is taken on record.

¶8

The victim- Kumkum has stated in paragraph no.4 of the affidavit that she has solemnized marriage with the applicant- Yogesh Kumar on 08.07.2023 and they have applied for on-line registration of marriage on 11.07.2023. She has stated in paragraph no.5 that she is living with the applicant as husband and wife and the victim is having pregnancy of one month and five days. The victim has further stated before this Court that she is major and as per High School, her date of birth is 10.10.2005 and the incident took place on 08.07.2023. The applicant- Yogesh Kumar has assured this Court that he will take care of his wife.

¶9

Heard Sri Vikrant Neeraj, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.P. Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submitted that the parties have solemnized marriage with each other on 08.07.2023 and they are living as husband and wife and the victim is having pregnancy of one month and five days. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted 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

¶11

investigation/trial.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has pointed out that the investigation is going on.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the statement of the victim given before this Court that the victim has solemnized marriage with the applicant on her own sweet will and she is having pregnancy of one month and five days, accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶14

In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant- Yogesh Kumar, involved in Case Crime No.435 of 2023, under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C., Police Station- Banna Devi, District- Aligarh, be released on anticipatory bail in light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 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:-

¶15

(i) The victim is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer for recording of her statement under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C..

¶16

(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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶18

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

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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

¶21

(NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶22

(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 his in accordance with law.

¶23

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.

¶24

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands allowed.

¶25

Order Date :- 6.10.2023 Krishna*

¶26

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yogesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Rajkishor Vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash Trivedi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Gupta @ Sachin Goyal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajeev Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others