Allowed

Sunil Alias Sunil Kumar Mauriya v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2025CRLA/7341/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a criminal appeal seeking anticipatory bail. The court set aside the bail rejection order for an appellant charged under Section 366 IPC. Relying on Apex Court precedents, the court held it was a fit case to grant bail till the end of the trial, noting the victim had admitted no sexual offence was committed. A bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties was ordered.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside; appellant granted bail till end of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each.

Sunil Alias Sunil Kumar Mauriya vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:4913

¶2

Court No. - 82

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7341 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Sunil Alias Sunil Kumar Maurya Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Manoj Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

1.Counter affidavit filed today by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant Sunil Alias Sunil Kumar Maurya with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 10.07.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pilibhit and release the appellant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 07 of 2024, under newly added Section 366 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Pilibhit.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the entire record.

¶9

The prosecution story, as unfolded in the F.I.R., is that minor daughter of the informant was enticed away by the present accused appellant and she was taken to Haldwani from Pilibhit and subsequently she came back to her house. Meanwhile an F.I.R. was lodged by father of the victim and investigation started. However, initially the F.I.R. was lodged under Section 363 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act but subsequently charge sheet was submitted and Section 366 I.P.C. was also added.

¶10

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent, he has not committed the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the accused appellant has committed no offence with the minor victim in this case and sexual offence was not committed by the accused appellant as admitted by the victim herself in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. During investigation, the appellant was granted interim anticipatory bail by the

¶11

coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.06.2024 in Criminal Appeal Defective No. 1331 of 2024 in other section. It is also submitted that during course of investigation, the appellant has cooperated with the investigation. It is next submitted that the appellant is having no criminal history and he is entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned learned A.G.A. by filing counter affidavit opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted that the minor victim was kidnapped by the present accused appellant and made sexual relation with her. The offence is very serious. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted and the appellant is not entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶13

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.

¶14

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶15

It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.

¶16

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶17

Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of appellant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and also as per statement of the victim herself recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

¶18

that no sexual offence has been committed by the present appellant and now charge sheet has been submitted and he has not misused the liberty of anticipatory bail, which was granted by coordinate Bench of this Court, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the appellant till end of the trial in the matter.

¶19

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the appellant is setaside.

¶20

In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till end of the trial on his 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 :-

¶21

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

¶22

(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 him / her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶23

(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 his before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶24

In case of default of any of the conditions, same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.

¶25

Order Date :- 9.1.2025 Rmk.

¶26

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunil Alias Sunil Kumar Mauriya v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Alias Sunil Kumar Mauriya v. State of U.P. 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

Punam Dubey vs State of U.P. and Another

Girish Upadhyay and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Rijwana Bano vs State of U.P. and Another

Vipin Saini vs State of U.P. and Another

Daadu @ Chelaram vs State of Up

Jitendra Singh Patel vs State of U.P. and Another