Salman Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13036 of 2024 Applicant :- Salman Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. Surendra Kumar Misra,Avnish Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶1Heard Sri Surendra Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Hari Shankar Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶2It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 18.11.2024 in Case Crime No. 798 of 2024 u/s 452, 376, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Sadar, District Lakhimpur Kheri. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged.

¶3Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the date of incident has been indicated as

24.11.2023 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 17.10.2024 pursuant to the application being filed u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. Even the aforesaid application has been filed after a substantial delay without explaining the reason of delay. the prosecutrisx is a married lady who is having two children and is sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the present applicant. The story, so narrated in the F.I.R., is not consistent in her statement u/s 180 B.N.S.S. inasmuch as in the F.I.R. she levelled allegation against two persons but u/s 180 B.N.S.S. the allegation has been levelled against the applicant only. The medical report has not substantiated the allegation made in the F.I.R. The medical examination report is such which should be a report of a married lady. The applicant has no criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Charge-sheet has been filed in this case.

¶4The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

¶5Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶6Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that the date of incident has been indicated as 24.11.2023 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 17.10.2024 pursuant to the application being filed u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C., even the application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been filed after a substantial delay without explaining the reason of delay, the prosecutrisx is a married lady who is having two children and is sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the present applicant, the story, so narrated in the F.I.R., is not consistent, in her statement u/s 180 B.N.S.S. inasmuch as in the F.I.R. she levelled allegation against two persons but u/s 180 B.N.S.S. the allegation has been levelled against the applicant only, the medical report has not substantiated the allegation made in the F.I.R., the applicant has no criminal history of any kind whatsoever, charge-sheet has been filed in this case and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶7Bail application is allowed.

¶8Let the applicant Salman Khan, involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

(v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned. . (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 18.12.2024 Om High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench