Devendra Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:16826

Court No. - 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 478 of 2025 Applicant :- Devendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sharda Prasad Mishra,Subhash Chandra Maurya,Vipin Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶5

Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0046 of 2024, under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Gujaini, District- Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

¶7

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant and the first informant/victim were in consensual relationship for more than six years. The consensual sexual relationship which if continued between the parties for a considerable period of 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 never promised to marry the victim. In support of his submission, counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prashant vs. State of NCT of Delhi, arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 2793 of 2024 decided on 20.11.2024 . Further, during the course of investigation, the applicant was granted interim protection by this Court till the cognizance is taken on the police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. vide order dated 06.03.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 3408 of 2028 (Devendra Kumar vs. State of U.P. and 3 others). The investigation has been completed. The applicant had cooperated in the investigation. Charge-sheet has been filed. 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. In case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶8

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

¶9

Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant, and 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 a considerable period of 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. During the course of investigation, the applicant was granted interim protection by this Court till the cognizance is taken on the police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. vide order dated 06.03.2024. Investigation has been completed. The applicant had cooperated in the investigation and 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.

¶10

In the event of arrest, the applicant Devendra Kumar, 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:-

¶11

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

¶12

(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;

¶13

(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.

¶14

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

¶15

The application stands disposed of.

¶16

Order Date :- 5.2.2025/Manish Kr

¶17

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

Devendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Kumar 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Har Prasad and Another vs State of U.P.

Shubham Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Alias Sachin Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shiva vs State of U.P.

Vimlesh Beldar vs State of U.P.

Sanjeet Kumar vs State of U.P.