Kapil Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:139147

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 6343 of 2025

Applicant :- Kapil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohit Kumar Singh,Sujata Choudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 1115 of 2019, under Sections 376, 328, 506, 452 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on anticipatory bail.

¶9

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant and two other accused persons. The allegation made in the F.I.R. is that on the day of occurrence the co-accused, Leelawati offered some sweets to the informant , due to which she felt gidding, then the said accused served her a medicinal tablet on account of which she became unconscious. When she regained consciousness she found herself on her bed in semi naked position. Next day the said accused, Leelawati and one other co-accused Preeti @ Sonu came and showed the informant a video clip in her mobile phone in which the accused-applicant was committing her rape. The F.I.R. further alleges on the pretext of alleged video the accused-applicant used to make sexual relations with the informant forcibly and the accused-applicant Leelawati and Preeti @ Sonu also used to blackmail her by extorting money on the pretext of alleged video clip. Learned counsel further submits that in her statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. the victim reiterated the same allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. and thereafter the charge sheet came to be filed against the applicant under Section 376, 328, 506, 452 I.P.C. on 18.03.2021 before the court concerned. It is in this context the first anticipatory bail application was filed by the applicant being Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 10294 of 2024, which was allowed by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.10.2024 and the applicant was directed to be released on anticipatory bail till submission of charge sheet. Learned counsel further submits that in that anticipatory bail application though it was averred on behalf of applicant that charge sheet has already been filed but due to some inadvertence the order was passed for till the submission of charge sheet, therefore, applicant moved a modification application but the same was dismissed as

¶10

withdrawn. Thus, learned counsel submits that the present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail to the applicant and the trial has already commenced. Learned counsel further submits that false and concocted story has been set up by the victim. There is no alleged video on record to show the complicity of applicant and to connect him with the alleged crime. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court to the marriage certificate issued by the Registrar Marriage, Ghaziabad to show that earlier to the alleged incident of rape committed upon the victim by the applicant, the applicant had already solemnized marriage with the elder daughter of the victim without the consent of her parents, therefore, to wreck the vengeance the present F.I.R. was lodged with the false and concocted story. In the medical examination no external or internal injury was found on the person of the victim. The victim herself is a married lady and is also mother-in-law of the applicant and on being unhappy with their marriage the present prosecution has been launched against him with malicious intention. Thus, it has been argued that applicant has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and that there is apprehension that coercive process may be issued against him as trial is going on. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to cooperate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the Court. It has been stated that in case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the trial and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. for the State 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- Kapil, 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 the court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶16

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

¶17

required.

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 14.8.2025 Mustaqeem.

¶22

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

Kapil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil 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