Sunil Verma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82659

Court No. - 86

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2783 of 2025

Applicant :- Sunil Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Bind Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 270 of 2017, under Sections 376, 452 I.P.C., Police Station Mohammadabad, District Farruhabad, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on anticipatory bail.

¶8

The F.I.R. was lodged by the informant against the applicant and one named person and one unknown with the allegation that when she was sleeping along with her daughter the accused applicant entered into her house and committed her rape forcibly, thereafter all the accused persons took golden jewelry and and fifteen thousand rupees kept in the box.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the informant/ victim in her statements recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that she lives in her parental house along with her two children. The applicant also lived with her and they lived as husband and wife. The applicant left her four months ago for solemnizing. Learned counsel further submits that there are material contradictions in the statements of the victim as well as in the statements of witnesses. Learned counsel further submits that collecting all the material during the course of investigation the Investigating Officer submitted final report. After final report was submitted by the police, the notice was issued to the informant, who in turn filed an application before the court concerned stating that therein that she does not want to file protest petition. Thereafter, the court concerned while rejecting the final report, took suo motu cognizance in the matter and summoned the accused-applicant. Thus, it has been argued that there is an

¶10

apprehension that the applicant may be arrested in the abovementioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

¶12

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 , it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶13

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶14

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶15

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Sunil Verma , involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall attend the court proceedings as and when required.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise or to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

(iii) the applicant shall cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶19

In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶20

Order Date :- 17.5.2025 Mustaqeem.

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunil Verma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Verma v. State of 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