Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5023 of 2021 Applicant :- Sangram Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Applicant :- Lakshman Singh,Santosh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant Sangram Singh in Case Crime No.816 of 2020, under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.-
Kotwali Orai, District - Jalaun.
The FIR version is that the applicant was married with opposite party no.3. On the date of incident, the applicant and other family members demanded additional dowry and car and for that they used to harass to the informant. The harassment continued and meanwhile her father died after that she was put to more harassment and finally she was sent back saying that unless the four-wheeler will not be provided the harassment will continue till she dies and after death the husband will marry again. The allegations of unnatural sex has already been made in the FIR, therefore, the FIR has been lodged.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the marriage took place in the year 2016 the allegation in the FIR are false and the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of general allegation. Therefore, a prima facie case for anticipatory bail is made out. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history and applicant is prepared to furnish sureties and bonds, there is no possibility of her either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and has submitted that after investigation charge sheet has already been filed and applicant could go for regular bail. .
Considering the submissions of both the sides, the applicant in this is the husband with whom the informant has been married; charge sheet has already been filed and as such it cannot be said that there is no evidence against him and a false allegation has been made against him. it is pertinent to mention that the anticipatory bail is not a substitute of a regular bail and for it, some extraordinary circumstances are required in comparison to regular bail. There should be some special reason for taking recourse of the provisions of anticipatory bail. The FIR has been lodged on 01.11.2020 and there is nothing on record to show that the police had made any serious efforts to make his arrest, therefore, there appears to be no threat of arrest. As such, I do not find any ground for giving benefit of anticipatory bail, hence the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant is rejected.
Regular bail application may be given before the appropriate forum and if such application is given, the court below shall consider and disposed of the bail application expeditiously and preferably on the same day in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 Mini