Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:208835

Court No. - 71

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11675 of 2023

Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vipin Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 271 of 2023, under sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D. P. Act, P.S. Lalganj, District Basti, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

In short, allegation against the applicant is that he committed rape with the victim on false pretext of marriage.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that victim is major and she made physical relations of her own sweet will and further submitted that the victim in her statement said to have been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. herself admitted her love affairs with the applicant for about four months as such she was consenting party. It is further submitted that the victim herself has refused her medical examination. Applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is having definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time.

¶10

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts.

¶11

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

¶12

the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 . 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.

¶13

In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant Pradeep Kumar, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail 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:-

¶14

(1) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;

¶15

(2) 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; and

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(5) 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.

¶19

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

¶20

(7) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii)

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 1.11.2023 RavindraKSingh

¶24

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

Pradeep Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Kumar 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

Pintu Alias Daroga Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Kumar Kesharwani Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Anil Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Farman @ Farmaan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abrar Shah and Another Vs State of U.P.