Chandrapal Singh v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6140 of 2023 Applicant :- Chandrapal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Prakash Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Yatharth Srivastava Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised. Rejoinder affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶2Heard Sri Shri Prakash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rashid Ali, Advocate holding brief of Sri Yatharth Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶3The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 112 of 2023, under Section 376 of IPC, Police Station Chunar, District Mirzapur, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶4As per prosecution story, the husband of the informant is stated to be of unsound mind, as such, the applicant, who happens to be the brother-in-law of the victim (dewar), is stated to have barged into her room and committed rape with her on 23.01.2023 at about 09:00 PM. At that time, the matter was not reported to be police owing to social compulsion. Subsequent to it, the FIR was instituted on 04.04.2023.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has apprehension of his arrest. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has further stated that the FIR is delayed by more than two months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is no medical report to corroborate the prosecution story. There is a family feud regarding the partition of property.

¶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. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶7On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the victim is a lady and her husband is of unsound mind. but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶8Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98" and also taking into consideration the fact that there is a delay in lodging the FIR coupled with the fact that there is no medical report to corroborate the prosecution story, I find it a fit case to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

¶9Without 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.

¶10In the event of arrest of the applicant, Chandrapal Singh 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;

¶11In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶12It 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 :- 28.11.2023 Siddhant High Court of Judicature at Allahabad