Brajesh Prajapati vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23833

Court No. - 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1299 of 2025

Applicant :- Brajesh Prajapati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ambreen Masroor,Sadrul Islam Jafri,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Sri Umesh Kumar, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the informant. The same is taken on record.

¶7

Heard counsel for the applicant, counsel for the informant, Sri V.P Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

This application under Section 482 B.N.S.S. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 16 of 2025, under Sections 69, 115(2), 352 of B.N.S., Police Station- Bharthana, District- Etawah.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant and the victim were in consensual relationship for more than four years. The consensual sexual relationship which if continued between the parties for considerable period of time could not be said to have continued under the 'misconception of fact' under Section 28 B.N.S. and could not be said to be 'sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means' under Section 69 B.N.S. No offence is made out against the applicant. 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. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The investigation is still pending. It is next submitted that the applicant has apprehension of his arrest and in case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant, and, in particular, the fact that the applicant and the victim were in consensual relationship for more than four years. The said relationship could not be said to have continued under the misconception of fact under Section 28 B.N.S. and could not be said to be 'sexual

¶12

intercourse by employing deceitful means' under Section 69 B.N.S. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to connect the applicant with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶13

In the event of arrest, the applicant Brajesh Prajapati , 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:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;

¶15

(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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court.

¶19

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.

¶20

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

¶21

The application stands disposed of.

¶22

Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Sachin Mishra

¶23

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

Brajesh Prajapati v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brajesh Prajapati v. State of U.P.

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

Shahur Khan @ Subur vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajkumari vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Kumar vs State of U.P.

Dipendra Kumar and Another vs State of U.P.

Gulshan Nishad vs State of U.P. and Another

Charan Singh vs State of U.P.