Mohit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 167 of 2024

Mohit Kumar

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. U.P. And Another	Home Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Akhilesh Kumar Singh : G.A., Nawab Ahmad Khan, Rajjab Ali

¶5

Court No. - 12

¶6

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The present application under Section 438 Cr.PC./482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 237/2024, under Sections 376, 504 I.P.C. (Now under Section 64 & 352 of B.N.S., 2023), at Police Station - Makhi, District - Unnao

¶9

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.11.2024 has passed the following order granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant:-

¶10

"1. Heard Shri Akhilesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Akhilesh Kumar Vyas, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶11

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No.0237/2024, under Sections 376, 504 I.P.C. (Now under Section 64 & 352 of B.N.S., 2023), at Police Station - Makhi, District - Unnao.

¶12

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. Attention of the Court has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R., wherein the date of the incident has been indicated as 30.07.2021 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 30.07.2024, after three years of the incident, without explaining the proper reasons of the delay. In the F.I.R., the allegation has been leveled that on the pretext of false promise of marriage, the applicant has established physical relation with the prosecutrix but now he is denying for marriage.

¶13

NABAIL No. 167 of 2024

¶14

2

¶15

4. Attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.3, which is a marriage agreement between the applicant and the prosecutrix dated 23.02.2023. Further, attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.4 dated 12.03.2024 which a petition filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., by the prosecutrix before the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Unnao wherein in paragraph 1, she has indicated that she is a legally wedded wife of the applicant and now the present applicant is demanding dowry, etc. and on account of non fulfillment of the aforesaid demand, he is harassing and torturing her. After more than 04 months from the aforesaid complaint dated 12.03.2024, the prosecutrix has lodged the impugned F.I.R. on 30.07.2024. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that since the allegations of the F.I.R. are such where the fact of false implication is apparent, applicant is cooperating in the investigation and he undertakes that if granted, shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order. Therefore, liberty of the applicant may be protected in view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Re:Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶16

5. Matter requires consideration.

¶17

6. Issue notice to opposite party No.2 returnable at an early date. Steps to be taken within a week. Office to proceed accordingly.

¶18

7. Let counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks. One week time thereafter is granted to the applicant to file rejoinder affidavit.

¶19

8. List this case in the week commencing 13th January, 2025.

¶20

9. Having considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, without entering into the merits of the issue, considering the delay in lodging of the F.I.R., the fact that application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the informant/opposite party No. 2 against the applicant and that the applicant has given an undertaking that he shall cooperate in the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, if granted, I find it appropriate that liberty of the present applicant may be protected in view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶21

10. Till the next date of listing, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶22

(i). the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required;

¶23

NABAIL No. 167 of 2024

¶24

3

¶25

(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 or tamper with the evidence; and

¶26

(iii). the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court."

¶27

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been released on interim anticipatory bail after filing of the personal bonds and two sureties in compliance of the aforesaid order. He has duly cooperated in the investigation. Charge-sheet in the case has been filed. He has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted by the Court. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial and in case, he is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of same.

¶28

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶29

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation so also the fact that charge-sheet in the case has been filed, the applicant has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted by the Court coupled with the undertaking given by the applicant that he will cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by the coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 26.11.2024 is made absolute.

¶30

In view of the aforesaid, the anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶31

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶32

September 15, 2025 Shravan

¶33

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

Mohit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P. and Another

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

Vijay Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ramkhelawan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Ram Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ajay Kumar Patel vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Naresh Kumar Agarwal and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Finance Lko. and Another