Allowed

Nagendra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Allahabad HC9 May 2024/772/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal sought recall of a bail rejection order dated 14.02.2024. The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and releasing the appellant on bail subject to personal bond and standard conditions, noting the prosecution case involved consent.

What did the court decide?

The appellant Nagendra Singh released on bail for Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of similar amount subject to standard conditions including appearing before the trial court.

Nagendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:35778

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 772 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Nagendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Dhruvendra Kumar Singh,Jai Shrinet Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Case called out. No one appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 2 despite service of notice. Learned AGA is present in the Court. In the aforesaid background of the case, the Court proceeded to hear the appeal on merits.

¶7

Heard counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 14.02.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sultanpur in Bail Application No. 216 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 182 of 2023, under Sections- 376, 504, 506 I.P.C., Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act and Section- 67 of I.T. Act, Police StationBarasagvar, District- Unnao.

¶9

While pressing the instant appeal, it is stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that the case of prosecution, as indicated in the FIR dated 16.11.2023, which is the basis of pending criminal proceedings against the appellant, is to the effect that the appellant enticed away the victim, daughter of informant, and after making false promise of marriage, established physical relations with her and also made video clips and based upon the same blackmailed her and made physical relations several times with her.

¶10

Further allegations in the FIR are to the effect that the appellant and his mother viraled obscene photographs and video clips of victim after making forged ID of victim.

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant stated that the allegations made in the FIR to the effect that the appellant and his mother viraled obscene photographs and video clips of victim itself proves that the FIR is completely false and concocted, as son and mother would not act in such a manner, as alleged in the FIR.

¶12

It is also stated that it is a case of consent. The appellant and victim were having love affair and thereafter, the marriage of victim was solemnized with appellant, as is apparent from the photographs of victim and the amount

¶13

transferred by the appellant in the account of victim on several occasions even when he was at Jordon, annexed as Annexure No. 6 to the present appeal at page 62 to 67 and 68 to 76, respectively.

¶14

It is stated that physical relations were established with victim with her consent, which can be accepted, as at the relevant point of time, the victim was major.

¶15

Further submission is that when the relationship of the appellant with victim was not accepted by the family members of victim, the victim was detained by the family members and for this reason, the appellant approached this Court by means of HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. 326 of 2023, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 30.10.2023 and a perusal of this order would show that the victim/detenue accepted the relationship with the appellant and she denied the fact pertaining to marriage with appellant. The relevant portion of the order dated 30.10.2023 reads as under:-

¶16

"Learned AGA has provided the written instructions received by him from the concerned police station along with the written statement given by the detenue dated 12.10.2023 and signed by the detenue and the signatures of the detenue have also duly attested. In the said application/statement, she has though admitted that she was having relationship with the deponent earlier, however, she has outrightly denied the fact that she has married to the deponent. She has stated that she is unmarried and happily living with her parents."

¶17

It is stated that denial of the fact pertaining to marriage of victim with appellant appears to have been given by victim under family pressure.

¶18

It is further stated that after dismissal of aforesaid petition, the FIR in issue was lodged on 16.11.2023. Thus also, it is apparent that on false and concocted story, the appellant and others were implicated in the instant case.

¶19

It is also stated that after investigation, the police has dropped the name of co-accused namely Shobha Singh and Supriya Singh.

¶20

It is further stated that if the case of prosecution is taken on its face value even then the chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case are extremely bleak in view of the law related to establishing relationship on the pretext of false promise of marriage. In this regard, he has placed reliance on the judgment(s) of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Deepak Gulati vs. State of Haryana (2013) 7 SCC 675; Sonu @ Subhash Kumar vs. State of U.P. and Another (2021) 7 SCC; and Mandar Deepak Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another 2022 SCC OnLine SC 2110 .

¶21

He lastly submitted that all the aforesaid aspects of the case were not considered by the trial court, as such, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and the appellant be enlarged on bail.

¶22

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the appellant particularly that it is a case of consent.

¶23

Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and all the relevant documents placed on record.

¶24

Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A., F.I.R., impugned order, as also the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments, referred above, as also the submission that the victim was in affair with the appellant and physical relations were established with her consent and particularly the Annexure No. 6, referred above, as also chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed .

¶25

Order dated 14.02.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sultanpur in Bail Application No. 216 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 182 of 2023, under Sections- 376, 504, 506 I.P.C., Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act and Section- 67 of I.T. Act, Police Station- Barasagvar, District- Unnao is hereby set aside.

¶26

Let the appellant- Nagendra Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :-

¶27

(i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶28

(ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶29

(iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s).

¶30

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶31

(v) The appellant 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.

¶32

(vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel.

¶33

(vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶34

(viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶35

In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to

¶36

treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

¶37

As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order.

¶38

Order Date :- 9.5.2024 Arun/-

¶39

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

Nagendra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagendra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

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

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dileep Singh Son of Ram Gopal Singh (Second Bail) Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Home

Ameen Ali and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Smt. Geeta vs State of U.P. through Prin. Secy., Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow and others

Mosim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and Another

Sateera Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others