Pravin Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10773 of 2023 Applicant :- Pravin Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Singh,Rajiv Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajeet Singh,Shivam Yadav Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶3The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.173 of 2023, registered under Sections 498A, 324, 376, 377, 506, 307, 511 IPC 3/4 D.P. Act at Police Station-Lalpur Pandeypur, District Varanasi with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶4As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the informant as per Hindu Rites on

03.12.2021. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of dowry. There are particular allegations against the applicant of unnatural offence having been committed to the victim and there are other allegations of sexual assault against the co-accused persons. The co-accused person Suraj Singh is stated to have even assaulted her with a spade causing lacerated wound to her.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is mentioned in the FIR that the applicant was doing job at Delih, as such has nothing to do with the said offence. The allegations against the applicant are vague and of general in nature. The co-accused person Suraj Singh has already been arrested. Learned counsel has further stated that the final report (charge-sheet) has been submitted and Sections 307, 511, 324 and 354 I.P.C. have been deleted. The FIR itself is delayed and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The case of the applicant is at a different footing to the arrested co-accused persons. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶6Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶8In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Pravin Kumar Singh be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

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

(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;

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

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

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

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

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶9It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial. Order Date :- 12.10.2023 Ravi Kant (Krishan Pahal, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad