Paramjeet Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:23672

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 575 of 2024

Applicant :- Paramjeet Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Samrat Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including up-to-date case diary.

¶7

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

¶8

The instant application has been moved by the accusedapplicant- Paramjeet in Case Crime No. 422 of 2023, under Sections 504, 506, 450 and 376 I.P.C., Police Station Nasirabad, District Raebareli, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, as he is apprehending arrest in the abovementioned case.

¶9

Various submissions have been raised by learned counsel for the applicant including the fact that there was no allegation of rape in the F.I.R. lodged by the victim and the same has been carved out subsequently in order to falsely implicate the case.

¶10

It is also submitted that in support of the allegations of rape, there is no medical evidence and the applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation and would remain present before the investigating officer as and when his presence would be required and there is no apprehension that after being released on anticipatory bail he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. Criminal history of two cases have been adequately explained in the affidavit enclosed with the anticipatory bail application.

¶11

Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail of the applicant by submitting that apart from the two criminal cases explained by the applicant, some other criminal cases are also emerging against the applicant.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected that though, the allegations of

¶13

rape were not stated in the F.I.R., however, in the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., she has alleged sexual assault against the applicant. Various submissions have been raised by learned counsel for the applicant in order to demonstrate that it is a case of false implication. This is not a stage where minute scrutiny or appreciation of evidence may be made, as that area would be available to the trial court at an appropriate stage. At this stage, only the allegation and the material/evidence, which may be made available in support of the same is to be considered by this Court.

¶14

Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, in the considered opinion of this Court, the facility of anticipatory bail may not be extended to the applicant and the same is, hereby, refused.

¶15

At this juncture, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he is intending to appear before the trial court for the purpose of getting regular bail, however, he is apprehending that when he will appear before the trial court for the purpose of obtaining regular bail, the disposal of his bail application may take sometime and in the meantime he may be confined in prison. It is requested that appropriate direction be given to the trial court for expeditious disposal of the regular bail application of the applicant.

¶16

No objection in this regard may be raised on behalf of the State, as otherwise also, it is the duty of each and every criminal court to dispose of the plea of bail of the applicant as well as of under trial with utmost expedition, even if there is no order of any superior Court in this regard.

¶17

Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, the instant anticipatory bail application moved on behalf of the applicant- Paramjeet is finally disposed of with a direction to the trial court that if the applicant appears/surrenders before the trial court within 15 days from today and move an application for bail under Section 437/439 Cr.P.C., the trial court shall be under an obligation to dispose of the same, after providing an opportunity of being heard to the parties, strictly in accordance with law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hussain and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors . reported in MANU/SC/0274/2017 as well as In Re: To issue certain Guidelines Regarding inadequacies and deficiencies in Criminal Trials v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others , MANU/SC/0292/2021 and in Satender Kumar Antil Vs.

¶18

Central Bureau of Investigation and others : (2021) 10 SCC 773.

¶19

Having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Nathu Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others':(2021)6 SCC 64, in order to facilitate the surrender/appearance of the applicant before the trial court, it is provided that for the next 15 days i.e. till 02.04.2024, applicant- Paramjeet, in case of his arrest under any process of the trial court, he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/Investigating Officer subject to the conditions that, he will cooperate in the investigation and shall not leave the boundaries of District Raebareli with a further condition that in any case the applicant would have to surrender/appear before the trial court on or before 02.04.2024.

¶20

It is clarified that if the applicant will not follow the terms of this order set-forth herein-before, after passage of 15 days from today, beyond 02.04.2024, he shall not be entitled for any benefit or protection of the instant order and the trial court shall be free to issue coercive process against him for his appearance.

¶21

It is clarified that all the observations contained in this order are only for disposal of this anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial proceedings in any manner.

¶22

Order Date :- 18.3.2024 Praveen

¶23

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rakesh Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Anil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Shahid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Jai Prakash Pandey @ Bindu Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Gopal Kumar Singh @ Gopal Singh Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. and Another

Ashish Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another