Allowed

Vansh Chaudhary v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Jul 2024ABAIL/6438/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a case registered under Sections 366 and 376 IPC. Relying on the statement under Section 164 CrPC indicating a long-standing consensual relationship, the court held that no offence under Section 376 IPC was made out. Bail was granted till the submission of the police report.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC with personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and sureties.

Vansh Chaudhary vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:110265

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6438 of 2024 Applicant :- Vansh Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mukesh Kumar Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant and the copy of the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. produced by learned A.G.A. are taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State, and Sri Mukesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant. 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. 112 of 2024, under Sections 366, 376 I.P.C., Police Station Kiratpur, District Bijnor.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. By placing reliance on the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. it is submitted that the applicant and the victim were in consensual relationship for four 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. No offence under Section 376 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶9

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

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report.

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicant- Vansh Chaudhary be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶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 S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶16

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶17

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶18

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶19

The application stands disposed of.

¶20

Order Date :- 8.7.2024 SKT/-

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vansh Chaudhary v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vansh Chaudhary 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Tiwari @ Suneel and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Smt Nisha Lambert and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Siddhu @ Sidu vs State of U.P. and Another

Devendra Kumar Sharma and Another vs State of Up and Another

Jitendra Kanaujiya vs State of Up and Another

Sudya and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another