Allowed

Himanshu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC14 Mar 2024/2592/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed the bail application of the accused in a case involving false pretence of marriage leading to sexual relations. Following the Supreme Court in Deepak Gulati, the court released the applicant on bail with personal bonds and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail in FIR No. 40 of 2024 under Sections 376, 506 IPC with personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 20,000 each.

Himanshu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:22412

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2592 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Himanshu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Gyanoday Shukla,Diwakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

In terms of the F.I.R. it was stated that the informant came into contact with the applicant around one year ago and on the false pretext of marriage, the applicant formed physical relations with her over a span of one year and on ten occasions, the applicant formed physical relations and now the applicant is refusing to marry her. A similar statement was also made by the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Gulati Vs. State of Haryana : AIR 2013 SC 2071 to argue that admittedly physical relations continued in between the parties over a span of one year, as such no case can be said to be made out against the applicant. The applicant is in custody since 2.2.2024 and has no criminal antecedents, hence the applicant may be released on bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Considering the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Gulati Vs. State of Haryana : AIR 2013 SC 2071, coupled with the fact that the entire case is premised on forming physical relations on false pretext of marriage which continued for a span of one year , and the fact that the applicant has no criminal

¶11

antecedents and is languishing in jail since 2.2.2024 and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant Himanshu be released on bail in FIR/ Crime No.40 of 2024, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kursi, District Barabanki on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶14

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶15

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶16

(c) 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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

Order Date :- 14.3.2024

¶18

Shukla

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Himanshu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Himanshu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Amit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Sachin Shrivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Home, Deptt., Lucknow

Rajesh Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Irfan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. U.P. Lko. and Others

Kushlesh Dixit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Jagdish Soni Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt., Lko.