Allowed

Roshan Rai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC8 Jan 2024BAIL/117/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to an applicant accused of fraudulent marriage and picking of girl under Section 376 IPC. Court noted Section 375(2) Cr.P.C. applicability due to false pretext of marriage and lack of force allegations, granting release on personal bonds and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.523 of 2023 on personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000 each.

Roshan Rai vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:27743

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 117 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Roshan Rai

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko.

¶6

Counsel for Applicant :- Aishwarya Pratap Singh,Anil Kumar Sharma,Sandeep Kumar(Trivedi) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶8

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

¶9

Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶10

In terms of the F.I.R., it was alleged that the informant had met the applicant online on a website Shaadi.com and on various occasions, he made made telephonic calls and they got married in a court on 29.6.2023 and thereafter on 21.11.2023 when the informant came to Lucknow, she came to know that the applicant was already married and was also having a child. A similar statement was also given by the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that even as per the allegations in the F.I.R., court marriage had taken place, learned counsel for the applicant argued that he would be entitled to benefit of Section 375(2) Cr.P.C. It is further argued that no step has been taken for annulment of the marriage as alleged by the informant and not accepted by the applicant. Prima facie, the relations in between the applicant and the victim were on the basis of the false pretext of marriage or hiding the correct fact and with regard to marriage, no allegation of any forceful relations was made. Hence, the applicant who is in jail since 28.11.2023 having no criminal history may be

¶12

enlarged on bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶14

Considering all these facts coupled with the fact that the applicant is in jail since 28.11.2023 having no criminal history, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant Roshan Rai be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.523 of 2023, under Sections 376, 420, 323 I.P.C. Police Station Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶17

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶18

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶19

(c) 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

Order Date :- 4.4.2024

¶21

Shukla

¶22

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

Roshan Rai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roshan Rai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko.

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

Chhote Lal Lodhi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Hajari Kuldeep Alias Hajari Kureel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. U.P. Lucknow and 3 Others

Shivam Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Irshad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lucknow and 4 Others

Dheeraj Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.