High Court

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 0050 of 2023, under sections 498-A,323,504,506 of the IPC and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Gonda. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 6.11.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- “Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record. Office is directed to print the name of Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, Advocate, as counsel for the opposite party no. 2 when the case is listed next. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0050 of 2023, under sections 498-A,323,504,506 of the IPC and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Gonda. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated. He next added that the instant matter pertains to the matrimonial dispute and there is no serious allegation against the applicant in so far as the narration in the first information report is concerned. He added that there is anonymity in between the wife and the husband and the first information report is outcome of the same. He also added that the applicant undertakes that he will always remain present before the trial court in each and every proceedings including the proceedings under section 125 of the Cr.P.C. and he will not abscond. He further added that the applicant was ready to pay the amount of Rs. 5 Lac to the opposite party no. 2 at the time of the mediation, but, due to the higher demand by the other side, the same has failed. He added that there is an acute apprehension that the police will arrest the applicant, though that is of no avail, as the chargeheet has already been filed. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the opposite party no. 2 is ready to live with the applicant, but, he is neither allowing the opposite party no. 2 to live with him nor he is appearing in the proceedings under section 125 of the Cr.P.C. and the other proceedings before the trial court. He also submits that the discharge application moved by the applicant, has already been dismissed. Adding his arguments, he submits that there is a child of five years with the opposite party no. 2 and she is being harassed as the offence has been committed by the applicant and as such, he is not entitled for any relief of anticipatory bail in any manner. learned AGA appearing for the State has supported the version of the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail. Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicant-Imran, shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (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 them 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 the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicants 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; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. List/put up this matter on 14.11.2024, within top ten cases of the list. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits It is expected that the applicant shall also remain present before the trial court including the proceedings under section 125 of the Cr.P.C., failing which, this court will reconsider the interim protection granted to the applicant.” State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Imran till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (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 the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this order. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 Shravan

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 0050 of 2023, under sections 498-A,323,504,506 of the IPC and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Gonda. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 6.11.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- “Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record. Office is directed to print the name of Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, Advocate, as counsel for the opposite party no. 2 when the case is listed next. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0050 of 2023, under sections 498-A,323,504,506 of the IPC and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Gonda. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated. He next added that the instant matter pertains to the matrimonial dispute and there is no serious allegation against the applicant in so far as the narration in the first information report is concerned. He added that there is anonymity in between the wife and the husband and the first information report is outcome of the same. He also added that the applicant undertakes that he will always remain present before the trial court in each and every proceedings including the proceedings under section 125 of the Cr.P.C. and he will not abscond. He further added that the applicant was ready to pay the amount of Rs. 5 Lac to the opposite party no. 2 at the time of the mediation, but, due to the higher demand by the other side, the same has failed. He added that there is an acute apprehension that the police will arrest the applicant, though that is of no avail, as the chargeheet has already been filed. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the opposite party no. 2 is ready to live with the applicant, but, he is neither allowing the opposite party no. 2 to live with him nor he is appearing in the proceedings under section 125 of the Cr.P.C. and the other proceedings before the trial court. He also submits that the discharge application moved by the applicant, has already been dismissed. Adding his arguments, he submits that there is a child of five years with the opposite party no. 2 and she is being harassed as the offence has been committed by the applicant and as such, he is not entitled for any relief of anticipatory bail in any manner. learned AGA appearing for the State has supported the version of the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail. Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicant-Imran, shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (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 them 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 the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicants 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; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. List/put up this matter on 14.11.2024, within top ten cases of the list. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits It is expected that the applicant shall also remain present before the trial court including the proceedings under section 125 of the Cr.P.C., failing which, this court will reconsider the interim protection granted to the applicant.” State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Imran till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (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 the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this order. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 Shravan