Allowed

Vijay Alias Dimple v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2024ABAIL/11779/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, Vijay Alias Dimple, charged with offences under IPC Sections 376, 504, 506, and 120-B. Reliance was placed on the long-standing consensual relationship between the parties and the lack of need for custodial interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of availability, non-interference with evidence, and restriction on leaving India.

Vijay Alias Dimple vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:192914

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11779 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vijay Alias Dimple Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Uday Raj,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant Sri Shashank Shekhar Pandey, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This application under section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.56 of 2023, under Sections 376, 504, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station Patwai, District Rampur.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant was in consensual relationship with the victim for more than six years. It is contended that the consensual sexual relationship which if continued between the parties for quite a long time could not be said to have continued under the 'misconception of fact' under Section 90 I.P.C. and could not be said to be 'rape' under Section 375 I.P.C. The applicant never made any promise to marry the victim. It is further contended that during the pendency of the investigation, the applicant was granted protection by this Court vide order dated 27.06.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9819 of 2023 (Vijay @ Dimple and another Vs. State of U.P. & 3 others). Investigation has been completed. The applicant had cooperated in the investigation. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has been summoned by the concerned court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and

¶11

antecedents of the applicant, in particular the fact, that the applicant and the victim were in consensual relationship for more than six years, the consensual sexual relationship which if continued between the parties for quite a long time could not be said to have continued under the 'misconception of fact' under Section 90 I.P.C. and could not be said to be 'rape' under Section 375 I.P.C., charge-sheet has been submitted, the applicant had cooperated in the investigation, no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicant Vijay @ Dimple involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

(i) the applicant shall make himself available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned;

¶14

(ii) 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;

¶15

(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court.

¶16

In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

¶17

8. The application stands disposed of

¶18

Order Date :- 10.12.2024 Lbm/-

¶19

Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vijay Alias Dimple v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Alias Dimple 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Utkarsh Singh vs State of Up and Another

Vibhuti Prakash Alias Vibhuti Prakash Sahu vs State of U.P. and Another

Vipin Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Neeraj Kumar vs State of U.P.

Archana Sharma vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikas vs State of U.P. and Another