Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 17672 of 2021 Applicant :- Bashimurrahman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Sharan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Vinod Singh holding brief of Sri Shiv Sharan Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ramanuj Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Sri Akhilesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant-Bashimurrahman, seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.529 of 2021, under Sections 506, 420, 313, 376 IPC, Police Station Bannadevi, District Aligarh.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 states that he has filed his vakalatnama in the office on behalf of the first informant on 21.10.2021 but the same is not on record.
Office is directed to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet regarding the same.
The prosecution case as per FIR lodged on 4.9.2021 by the first informant is that she is working as clerk in the tube-well department and is a divorced lady having ten years old son. The applicant is also working in the same department. She met with the applicant round eight years back and the applicant made proposal to marry her and stated that he will marry her after his sister gets married. On the said assurance and promise to marry, there was physical relationship between them since then. In the meantime she became pregnant and when she informed the applicant about it, he gave her some medicines due to which her pregnancy got aborted and she became ill, then she pressurized the applicant to marry her which was in the year 2018 and the applicant accepted the same. Thereafter nikah started and signatures were to be done on the nikahnama which the applicant refused to sign and assured her to marry her later.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the present case is a case of consent. The prosecutrix is a major woman. There was some understanding between the applicant and the prosecutrix with regards to marriage which could not materialize and hence present FIR has been lodged. The applicant has been falsely implicated with ulterior motive. It is further argued that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the said fact is mentioned in para no.8 of the affidavit.
Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and argued that the applicant is involved in the present case as he established physical relationship with the prosecutrix on false promise of marriage for about eight years.
After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that there was some understanding between the parties with regards to marriage. They were in relationship since eight years. Their marriage could not materialize.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.
In the event of arrest of the applicant-Bashimurrahman, involved in Case Crime No.529 of 2021, under Sections 506, 420, 313, 376 IPC, Police Station Bannadevi, District Aligarh, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police office as and when required;
(ii) 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 office;
(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.
In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.
The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant(s) along with a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 22.10.2021 Gaurav