Ram Vilas v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11815 of 2023 Applicant :- Ram Vilas Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nanhe Lal Tripathi,Prateek Prajapati Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1Heard Sri Nanhe Lal Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶2The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Complaint Case No. 04 of 2022, under Sections 323, 306, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Gursahayganj, District Kannauj, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶3As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith other named co-accused persons is stated to have barged into the house of the complainant on 13.1.2022 at about 2.00 pm and are stated to have assaulted his 16 years old daughter. It is also alleged in the complaint that on 5.12.2021, another member of the family of the applicant namely, Kanhaiya had committed rape with the daughter of the complainant, which was registered as FIR No. 687 of 2021 under the provisions of POCSO Act and 376, 323, 506 IPC.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has the apprehension of his arrest. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has next stated that the said complaint case has been filed after the delay of about 6 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved by the informant against the applicant and other co-accused persons, which was treated as complaint case and after the statements of the witnesses, the applicant and other co-accused persons have been summoned vide order dated 6.10.2022 of the Special Court, POCSO Act, Kannauj. Learned counsel has further stated that the said order has been passed without application of mind and taking into consideration the fact that earlier on, prior to the present complaint case, two complaint cases were registered by the aunt of the deceased person and there are several litigations going on between the parties. Even one complaint case has been filed on behalf of the applicant against the family members of the complainant. It is further stated that the said complaint case is just the misuse of the process of Court. No ingredients of abetment to suicide are made out, as there is no role of abetment to commit suicide assigned to the applicant or to any other co-accused persons. As such, the ingredients of Section 306 IPC do not stand fulfilled.

¶5Several 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. It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents except the said case instituted by the members of one and the same family. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶6On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶8Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.

¶9In the event of arrest of the applicant, Ram Vilas involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:- 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 previous permission of the court; iv. that 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;

¶10In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶11It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. (Justice Krishan Pahal) Order Date :- 28.10.2023 Shalini High Court of Judicature at Allahabad