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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:16166

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 248 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Gautam Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Pandey,O.P. Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Sri O.P. Tiwari, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Arvind Kumar Pandey, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and Sri Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the informant and filed his vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

¶8

The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.0620 of 2024, under Sections 75(2), 64(2)m B.N.S., registered at Police Station Motipur, District Bahraich.

¶9

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 08.12.2024 alleging that while the informant's daughter aged about 17 years had gone to the fields to get fodder at about 11.00 a.m. on 11.10.2024, the applicant molested her. The informant's daughter raised hue and cry, whereupon certain villagers reached there and saved the informant's daughter. Thereafter, the applicant's parents were called and told about the incident.

¶10

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS, she stated that after incident that took place at 10.00

¶11

a.m. on 11.10.2024, the villagers reached there and they sent her with the applicant. The applicant kept her at his home for two months but thereafter he did not marry her and turned her out of his home. In her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS the victim stated that initially the parents of the applicant had promised to get them married but thereafter they declined to do so. The victim declined to undergo medico legal examination.

¶12

In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bailapplication it has been contended that the applicant is innocent, he has no criminal history and he has falsely been implicated in the present case.

¶13

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶14

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the incident took place on 11.10.2024 and the victim has stated that after the incident she was sent with the applicant to live at his home; that the F.I.R. has been lodged on 08.12.2024 i.e. about two months after the alleged incident; that the allegation of rape is not supported by medical examination report; that the applicant is aged about 18 years and it is not legally permissible for him to marry the victim coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and without making any observations which may affect the outcome of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶15

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed . In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant-Gautam Kumar before the learned Trial Court in

¶16

the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court:

¶17

(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶18

(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶19

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court'

¶20

(iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and

¶21

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶22

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 20.3.2025 Ram.

¶24

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pankaj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Jagdeep Kanojiya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko

Pawan Kumar Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Home) and 3 Others

Shivraj Verma @ Dharme @ Dharmraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Vishram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Manoj Saroj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.