Allowed

Prabal Agnihotri v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Feb 2023BAIL/6057/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6057 of 2023, the Allahabad High Court acted as a substitute for the trial court and granted bail to the applicant, Prabal Agnihotri, accused of rape under Section 376 IPC, citing Apex Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to conditions preventing tampering, intimidating witnesses, and committing further crimes.

Prabal Agnihotri Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6057 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Prabal Agnihotri Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Tripathi,Utkarsh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Narendra Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Vikas Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Narendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the complainant as well as Sri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 646 of 2022, under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Farrukhabad, District Farrukhabad, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have met the victim in a mandir (temple) on 10.11.2021 and is stated to have later on sent a friend request on her facebook ID, which was accepted and both of them started communicating with each other. The applicant is stated to have sexually assaulted the victim on 8.2.2022 at about 12.00 noon by taking her to hotel and is stated to have later on repeated the said act several times on the pretext of marrying her. Later on, the applicant is stated to have refused to marry her by saying that he would marry her only if is provided a dowry of Rs. 60 lakhs.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated 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. Learned counsel has further stated that there is nothing on record to suggest that the applicant has committed any offence. The victim has herself stated before the investigating officer that the same kind of offence was committed with her by another accused Mohit Tomar, who is also constable in the police. Learned counsel has next stated that the applicant is entitled

¶10

for bail on this ground also.

¶11

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 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.

¶12

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. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.11.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application and has placed reliance on the NCR against one Sumit Chaturvedi, which was lodged under Section 151 Cr.P.C. and has stated that the same person threatened her to enter into compromise, although learned counsel for the informant could not place any document to show that any FIR has been lodged against the applicant by the informant or her family members.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, judgement of the Apex Court referred, severity of punishment, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant- Prabal Agnihotri involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶16

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the

¶17

trial.

¶18

ii. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶19

iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

iv. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶21

v. 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.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶23

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶24

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶25

Order Date :- 16.2.2023 Shalini

¶26

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Prabal Agnihotri v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabal Agnihotri v. State of U.P.

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

Suraj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gaurav Vs State of U.P.

Amit Adjariya Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Paswan Vs State of U.P.

Annu Widow Vs State of U.P.

Gopal Chauhan Vs State of U.P.