Rahul vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:7587

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 303 of 2025

Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Deepesh Kumar Ojha,Himanshu Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA, for the State, apprised the Court that notice has been served to the informant of the case on 7.2.2024. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the informant.

¶7

Learned AGA also apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, the instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off.

¶8

Heard Sri Deepesh Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA, for the State.

¶9

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 0373 of 2023, under Sections 354A, 354D, 352 and 506 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Simbhaoli, District Hapur during pendency of the trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the basis of false allegation applicant has been made accused in the present matter and earlier on 22.2.2024 after considering entire facts of the case in detail he has been released on anticipatory bail in the present matter for offences under Sections 354C, 352, 506 and 294 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act but after investigation charge sheet has also been filed against the applicant for offences under

¶11

Sections 354A and 354D IPC, therefore, the applicant should also be released on anticipatory bail for these added offences.

¶12

He further submits that applicant is having apprehension if he will appear before the court concerned then he will be sent to jail.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶15

Considering the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that earlier in the present matter applicant has already been released on anticipatory bail for offences under Sections 354C, 352, 506 and 294 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act and subsequently during investigation offences under Sections 354A and 354D IPC have been added and charge sheet has also been filed against the applicant, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail for added offences too till the conclusion of the trial.

¶16

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail anticipatory application is allowed.

¶17

In the event of arrest of the applicant -Rahul involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of the trial case on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court concerned with the conditions:-

¶18

(i) that 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

¶19

the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

(ii) that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶21

(iii) that the applicant shall not temper with the evidence during the trial;

¶22

(iv) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶23

(v) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶24

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicants.

¶25

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

¶26

Order Date :- 17.1.2025

¶27

SKM

¶28

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Surati Devi and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Anas Jahir Alias Anas Tahir vs State of U.P. and Another

Rizwan vs State of U.P.

Ram Lal Yadav vs State of U.P.

Abhiramjeet Yadav vs State of U.P.

Govind Prajapati Alias Govind Ramkishor Prajapati vs State of U.P. and Another