Gajendra alias Ajay Kumar and another v. State of U.P. and another) and Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail App

Applicant :- Sukhveer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Sahu,Praveen Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

1. By order dated 25.4.2025 the present application was directed to be connected with Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.997 of 2025 (Gajendra alias Ajay Kumar and another vs. State of U.P. and another) and Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.1857 of 2025 (Fateh Singh and another vs. State of U.P. and another).

2. Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri V. P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the material on record.

3. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Session Case No. 2072 of 2024, under Sections 395, 354 I.P.C., Police Station - Mujariya, District- Budaun, during the pendency of trial.

4. At the outset, counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Fateh Singh and Umesh have been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 02.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.1857 of 2025 . The order dated 02.05.2025 is quoted herein below :- "1. As per office report dated 04.04.2025, notice of the instant application has been served upon the opposite party no.2. However, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2 nor any counter affidavit has been filed on her behalf.

2. Heard counsel for the applicants and Sri V. P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the material on record.

3. The applicants were granted interim anticipatory bail vide order dated 06.03.2025 by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The order is quoted herein below:- "1. Heard Praveen Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicants for enlarging them on bail in Session Case No. 2072 of 2024, under Sections 395, 354 I.P.C., Police Station Mujariya, District Budaun.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The instant complaint has been lodged by O.P. No. 2 with malicious intention only to harass the applicants and learned Magistrate without applying the judicial mind issued the summons. The complaint is not supported by any material evidence and prima facie, no offence under the alleged section is made out. In case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they would not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate with the investigation. Applicants have definite apprehension of their arrest by the police.

4. Learned A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of the State.

5. Issue notice to opposite party No.2, returnable at an early date.

6. Learned A.G.A. is granted two week's time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

7. List this case after four weeks and connect with Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.997 of 2025 (Gajendra @ Ajay Kumar and another Vs. State of U.P. and another).

8. As an interim protection, till the next date of listing fixed for hearing on this application, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number. In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- 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 applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required; (ii) The applicants 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P./C.P./A.C.P concerned. (iv) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (v) The applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (vi) The applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted.

9. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Govt. Advocate/concerned court is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants."

4. Counsel for the applicants contends that the applicants had furnished bail bonds before the court concerned. The applicants are appearing before the court on the dates fixed. It is next contended that the applicants and opposite party no.2 are residents of the same locality. A prior enmity exists between the parties. There are inconsistencies in the complaint version and in the statement of the complainant/victim under Section 200 Cr.P.C. with regard to the exact role of the applicants and the other accused. It is contended that the said inconsistencies discredit the case of the complainant at this stage. The applicants neither acted indecently with the complainant nor threatened and robbed her. The alleged witnesses are the relatives of the complainant/victim. The applicants have been summoned by the concerned court. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. In case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial they will not misuse the said liberty.

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicants, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicants and the fact that pursuant to the interim order dated 05.03.2025 the applicants are appearing before the concerned court on the dates fixed; no violation of conditions or misuse of liberty of interim anticipatory bail has been pointed out by learned AGA.; there are inconsistencies in the complaint version and in the statement of the complainant/victim under Section 200 Cr.P.C. with regard to the exact role of the applicants and other co-accused; at this stage there is no substantive evidence against the applicants and without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

7. In the event of arrest, the applicants Fateh Singh and Umesh, involved in Session Case No. 2072 of 2024, under Section 395, 354 I.P.C., Police Station Mujariya, District Budaun, be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicants shall make themselves available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) the applicants 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; (iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passports, the same shall be deposited by them before the concerned court.

8. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

9. The application stands disposed of."

5. It is contended that the case of the applicant stands on similar footing to the case of aforesaid co-accused Fateh Singh and Umesh. The applicant claims parity. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial he will not misuse the said liberty.

6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

7. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that identically placed co-accused Fateh Singh and Umesh have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court and without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

8. In the event of arrest, the applicant Sukhvir shall be released on anticipatory bail in aforesaid case, during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall make himself available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (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; (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 concerned court.

9. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

10. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 2.5.2025 Manish Kr

Applicant :- Sukhveer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Sahu,Praveen Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

1. By order dated 25.4.2025 the present application was directed to be connected with Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.997 of 2025 (Gajendra alias Ajay Kumar and another vs. State of U.P. and another) and Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.1857 of 2025 (Fateh Singh and another vs. State of U.P. and another).

2. Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri V. P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the material on record.

3. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Session Case No. 2072 of 2024, under Sections 395, 354 I.P.C., Police Station - Mujariya, District- Budaun, during the pendency of trial.

4. At the outset, counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Fateh Singh and Umesh have been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 02.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.1857 of 2025 . The order dated 02.05.2025 is quoted herein below :- "1. As per office report dated 04.04.2025, notice of the instant application has been served upon the opposite party no.2. However, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2 nor any counter affidavit has been filed on her behalf.

2. Heard counsel for the applicants and Sri V. P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the material on record.

3. The applicants were granted interim anticipatory bail vide order dated 06.03.2025 by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The order is quoted herein below:- "1. Heard Praveen Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicants for enlarging them on bail in Session Case No. 2072 of 2024, under Sections 395, 354 I.P.C., Police Station Mujariya, District Budaun.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The instant complaint has been lodged by O.P. No. 2 with malicious intention only to harass the applicants and learned Magistrate without applying the judicial mind issued the summons. The complaint is not supported by any material evidence and prima facie, no offence under the alleged section is made out. In case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they would not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate with the investigation. Applicants have definite apprehension of their arrest by the police.

4. Learned A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of the State.

5. Issue notice to opposite party No.2, returnable at an early date.

6. Learned A.G.A. is granted two week's time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

7. List this case after four weeks and connect with Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.997 of 2025 (Gajendra @ Ajay Kumar and another Vs. State of U.P. and another).

8. As an interim protection, till the next date of listing fixed for hearing on this application, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number. In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- 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 applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required; (ii) The applicants 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P./C.P./A.C.P concerned. (iv) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (v) The applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (vi) The applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted.

9. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Govt. Advocate/concerned court is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants."

4. Counsel for the applicants contends that the applicants had furnished bail bonds before the court concerned. The applicants are appearing before the court on the dates fixed. It is next contended that the applicants and opposite party no.2 are residents of the same locality. A prior enmity exists between the parties. There are inconsistencies in the complaint version and in the statement of the complainant/victim under Section 200 Cr.P.C. with regard to the exact role of the applicants and the other accused. It is contended that the said inconsistencies discredit the case of the complainant at this stage. The applicants neither acted indecently with the complainant nor threatened and robbed her. The alleged witnesses are the relatives of the complainant/victim. The applicants have been summoned by the concerned court. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. In case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial they will not misuse the said liberty.

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicants, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicants and the fact that pursuant to the interim order dated 05.03.2025 the applicants are appearing before the concerned court on the dates fixed; no violation of conditions or misuse of liberty of interim anticipatory bail has been pointed out by learned AGA.; there are inconsistencies in the complaint version and in the statement of the complainant/victim under Section 200 Cr.P.C. with regard to the exact role of the applicants and other co-accused; at this stage there is no substantive evidence against the applicants and without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

7. In the event of arrest, the applicants Fateh Singh and Umesh, involved in Session Case No. 2072 of 2024, under Section 395, 354 I.P.C., Police Station Mujariya, District Budaun, be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicants shall make themselves available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) the applicants 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; (iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passports, the same shall be deposited by them before the concerned court.

8. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

9. The application stands disposed of."

5. It is contended that the case of the applicant stands on similar footing to the case of aforesaid co-accused Fateh Singh and Umesh. The applicant claims parity. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial he will not misuse the said liberty.

6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

7. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that identically placed co-accused Fateh Singh and Umesh have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court and without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

8. In the event of arrest, the applicant Sukhvir shall be released on anticipatory bail in aforesaid case, during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall make himself available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (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; (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 concerned court.

9. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

10. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 2.5.2025 Manish Kr