Akshay Rastogi v. State of U.P. and Anotehr

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12944 of 2023 Applicant :- Akshay Rastogi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anotehr Counsel for Applicant :- Shikhar Neelkanth Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bharat Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Mohit Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bharat Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri S.P. Pandey, 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.151 of 2023, registered under Sections 498-A, 323, 313, 316, 342, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, at Police Station-Kotwali, District-Budaun 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

22.11.2021. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of Rs.20 lakhs and one luxury car in dowry. There are particular allegations against the applicant and other accused persons of having forced her medical termination of pregnancy twice, as such, the allegations under Section 313 I.P.C. have also been made.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case. All the allegations are general in nature. There is nothing on record to suggest that applicant has committed the said offence. There is no medical report to corroborate the prosecution story. Learned counsel has stated that the present case is nothing but misuse of dowry laws. It is true that parties had fallen apart, but subsequent to the institution of present FIR, the informant has given birth to a baby-girl.

¶6Several 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 has stated that 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.

¶7Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. Learned counsel has further stated that on

19.8.2022 the victim was pregnant, as such, the allegations of medical termination of pregnancy stand fortified.

¶8On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of accusations and taking into consideration that there is no medical report to corroborate the prosecution story coupled with the fact that applicant has no criminal antecedent, 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.

¶9In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Akshay Rastogi be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond 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.

¶10It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial. Order Date :- 24.11.2023 Vikas [Krishan Pahal, J.] High Court of Judicature at Allahabad