Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52064 of 2019 Applicant :- Jitendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilendra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
Shri Vijay Tripathi, Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama in the Court today on behalf of informant which is taken on record.
This anticipatory bail application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved seeking the bail of applicant namely Jitendra, in the event of his arrest in Case Crime No.465 of 2019, under sections 376, 506 and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant has not been able to point out any such aspect which may persuade this Court to lean favourably towards the accused. The fact that applicant had been physically exploiting the victim appears to be a proven fact at this stage. Counsel for the first informant has drawn the attention of the Court towards the application that is said to have been moved before District Marriage Officer, Firozabad to register marriage which further proved that the physical relationship with the victim were being made under the false promise of marriage. It appears that the promise of marriage was deployed as a deceitful ploy to exploit the victim physically and now she has been left high and dry for no valid reason. Counsel has also not been able to show any such material which may indicate that the applicant was having any justifiable reason for not accepting the victim. It appears that all the time the applicant was having no bona fide intention to have marriage and was simply outraging the honour of the victim girl. The accused appears to be simply masquerading himself to be a genuine lover while his real intention appears to be nothing but to exploit the victim physically and to perpetuate his lecherous scheme which he has successfully performed.
After considering the submissions advanced on behalf of rival sides, the nature and gravity of the accusation and the material in support of the same, I find no good ground for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 shiv