Dharmendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10269

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 125 of 2025

Applicant :- Dharmendra Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kr. Yadav Warsi,Deepesh Kumar Yadav,Priyanka Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Kumar Gupta,Suresh Kumar Gupta

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Santosh Kr. Yadav Warsi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shani Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Sri Suresh Kumar Gupta, advocate, who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party No. 2/ informant. The same are taken on record.

¶7

2.This is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application has been dismissed as withdrawn giving liberty to the applicant to file afresh vide order dated 07.01.2025 in CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 263 of 2024 (Dharmendra Yadav versus State of U.P and 3 Others).

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No. 0339 of 2024, under Sections 108 B.N.S., Police Station- Gosaiganj, DistrictLucknow.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. Learned Counsel for the applicant has stated that since the present applicant is serving in Indian Army and he is posted at Border of India, therefore, he could not notice the impugned F.I.R. Though against the impugned F.I.R., the applicant filed a petition before this court which was dismissed as withdrawn giving liberty to the applicant to file anticipatory bail application vide order 07.01.2025. Learned Counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant was willing to get married with the victim but in the mean time he was trapped by one cheater with whom the applicant met through Facebook and he got married with her in an Arya Samaj Temple but as soon as the applicant came to

¶10

know that he has been cheated and that lady with whom he had married was already married. Thereafter, he tried to settle the dispute by paying amount of rupees 50,000/- to her. It is further submitted that this fact was well known to the brother of the victim inasmuch as the brother of the victim is serving in the Police Department whereas the present applicant is serving in the Indian Army. Learned Counsel for the applicant has shown sum WhatsApp Chat dated 31.07.2024 wherein the victim had asked for some help from the present applicant, however, on that point of time the Mobile phone of the present applicant was seized in the Police Station.

¶11

Learned Counsel for the Applicant as further submitted that the victim committed suicide and the allegation against the present applicant is that on account of the physical and mental torture by the present applicant the victim committed suicide.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. for the State has informed that the applicant is not co-operating in the investigation, therefore, charge sheet has not been filed against the applicant.

¶13

Learned counsel for the state as well as opposite party No. 4/ informant has opposed the aforesaid prayer for bail by submitting that the present applicant has not co-operated in the investigation and if he is granted anticipatory bail, he may flee from the investigation proceedings. On that, Learned Counsel for the applicant has reiterated the aforesaid undertaking that the applicant would coperate in the investigation.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that investigation is going on. The applicant has no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and is having his permanent residence, therefore, there is no flight risk and the learned counsel for the applicant undertakes on behalf of the applicant that the applicant shall co-operate in the investigation proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, if so granted by this Court. He further stated that in view of the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal And Others Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) And Another 2005 SCC 1, the liberty of the applicant may be protected till conclusion of the investigation and filing of the police report.

¶15

Therefore, without entering into the merits of the issue and considering the fact that the present applicant is serving in Indian Army and he is posted at Border of India; the present applicant was willing to get married with the victim;the applicant has no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; the undertaking of the applicant that she shall co-operate in the investigation and she shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory

¶16

bail, I find it appropriate that liberty of the applicant may be protected till completion of investigation and filing of police report in the light of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal And Others Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) And Another 2005 SCC 1.

¶17

It is further directed that in the event of arrest, applicant- Dharmendra Yadav shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number till completion of the investigation and filing of police report on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court/court concerned/arresting authority with the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) that the applicant shall appear before the investigating officer at 11:00 a.m. on 21.02.2025 to cooperate in the investigation and shall further cooperate in the investigation till completion of the investigation and filing of the police report, failing which any appropriate application may be filed by the learned counsel for the informant for by the State for cancellation of this protection being granted by this court.

¶19

(ii) 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/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶20

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the court;

¶21

(iv) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence during trial;

¶22

(v) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶23

(vi) that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the learned counsel for the State shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶24

This anticipatory bail application is disposed of in view of the above terms.

¶25

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)

¶26

Order Date :- 17.2.2025 (Manoj K.)

¶27

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

Dharmendra Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko 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

Gulshan vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Dev Mani Mishra and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Finance Lko. and 3 Others

Baburam Dubey vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Finance Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Smt. Afsari Khatoon Alias Gudia Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko.

Dharmendra Kumar Mishra @ Babban Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Triveni Prasad @ Laddan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.