Allowed

Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Sept 2024ABAIL/1756/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by the accused in a rape case. Relying on Sushila Aggarwal, the court noted the lack of corroborative evidence, the victim's medical examination findings, and the accused's cooperation in investigation and trial.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application was allowed, and the interim protection granted vide order dated 06.08.2024 was made absolute.

Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:65424

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1756 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Awasthi,Shubham Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Alok Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in F.I.R./Case Crime No.260 of 2017 under Sections 376/452/506 I.P.C., Police Station Mitauli, District Kheri.

¶7

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

¶8

This Court while granting interim protection to the applicant vide order dated 06.08.2024 has passed the following order:-

¶9

"1. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 260 of 2017 under Sections 376/452/506 I.P.C., Police Station Mitauli, District Kheri.

¶10

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as perused the record.

¶11

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation. The incident is of the year 2017. The FIR has been lodged on 3.10.2017. The victim is a married lady and mother too. There is no corroborative evidence in the prosecution case. Nothing has been found in the medical examination of the victim. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. He further submits that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial.

¶12

4. Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. He prays for and is allowed two weeks' time to file objections/counter affidavit.

¶13

5. Issue notice to respondent No.2.

¶14

6. List on 28.8.2024.

¶15

7. Considering the above aspects of the matter, perusal of the record and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, charge-sheet has been filed, in the medical of the victim nothing has been found as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C till the next date of listing.

¶16

8. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant- Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Kumar Gupta shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶17

1. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶18

2. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

3. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶20

4. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail.

¶21

Such other reasonable conditions which the learned trial court may deem fit may be imposed."

¶22

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after investigation charge sheet was filed on 12.4.2018 and cognizance was taken on 24.08.2018. Matter is pending before the Magistrate for committal and only summoning is going on. Till filing of this anticipatory bail application, no bailable warrant was issued against the applicant. The applicant has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

¶23

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the applicant has approached this Court in anticipatory bail after seven years.

¶24

On due consideration to the submission advanced by the parties, charge sheet has been filed as well as fact that the prosecution case lacks any corroborative evidence so also the statement of mother-in-law and daughter of the complainant as well as statement of the victim,, he has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 06.08.2024 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 .

¶25

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

¶26

In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed .

¶27

Order Date :- 20.9.2024 Ashutosh

¶28

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

Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. 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

Mohammad Miya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sunil Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Vijay Kumar Singh and 20 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Labour., Lko. and Another

Mr. Mohammad Ashfaq Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Ranjeet Singh Alias Ranjeet Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ankur Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.