Allowed

Chirag Maheshwari v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Oct 2023BAIL/40447/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application in a sexual offences case involving a consensual relationship between two educated majors. The court released the applicant on personal bond and sureties, imposing conditions to prevent tampering and ensuring trial attendance.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding conduct and court attendance.

Chirag Maheshwari Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:196865

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40447 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Chirag Maheshwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anjali Singh,Ankit Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ved Byas Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

1. List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Vinod Kant, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Ankit Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ved Byas Mishra, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Bare Lal Bind, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Chirag Maheshwari, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 267 of 2019, under Section 376 I.P.C. registered at P.S. Mahila Thana, District Ghaziabad.

¶9

The F.I.R. of the present matter was lodged on 28.11.2019 by the victim herself against the applicant alleging therein that she is an Interior Designer. She met with the applicant around two years back and since then they were in contact with each other. The applicant on false promise of marriage established physical relationship with her. He concealed the fact that he was previously married and having a wife.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the informant/victim and the applicant are well educated persons. Both are undisputedly major. It is argued that relationship between the parties was of consensual relationship. Subsequently some misunderstanding arose and then the present F.I.R. has been lodged. It is argued that the applicant has no other criminal antecedents as stated in para-45 of the affidavit and is in jail since 24.8.2023.

¶11

Per contra, learned State counsel and learned counsel for the first informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the first informant did not dispute the fact that the victim and the applicant are major and well educated persons

¶12

but submits that the applicant made friendship with the informant and there was physical relationship between them on his pretending to be a single person. It was subsequently discovered that he is a married person having a wife. It is argued that as such the F.I.R. was lodged.

¶13

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim is a major girl and well educated person. The relationship between the parties was consensual.

¶14

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Let the applicant- Chirag Maheshwari, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when 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.

¶19

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.

¶20

(V) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the

¶21

applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.

¶22

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶23

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶24

The bail application is allowed.

¶25

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶26

Order Date :- 12.10.2023 Naresh

¶27

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

Chirag Maheshwari v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chirag Maheshwari 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satendra Gaud Vs State of U.P.

Riyaz Khan@ Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Kapil Bhardwaj Vs State of U.P.and Another

Guddu Vs State of U.P.

Bharat Vs State of U.P.

Ratan Singh @ Rinku Vs State of U.P.