High Court · 2025

1. At the very outset, Ms. Divya Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant has requested that she may be permitted to delete the opposite party no.2 from the array of the opposite parties.

2. On the aforesaid request, she is permitted to delete the opposite party no.2 from the array of the opposite parties during the course of the day

3. Heard Ms. Divya Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Ran Vijay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

4. The present applicant- Vishal Kumar is in jail since 22.12.2024, in Case Crime No. 354 of 2024, under Sections 376, 504 and 506 of I.P.C. at Police Station Kotwali Cantt, District Ayodhya/Faizabad.

5. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 22.12.2024. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged.

6. The attention of this Court has drawn towards Annexure No. 2 of the bail application, which is an earlier F.I.R. being lodged by the same complainant/prosecutrix against the present applicant on 24.09.2024 in Case Crime No. 503 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3) and Section 85 of B.N.S., 2023, District Ayodhya/Faizabad, levelling allegations that the present applicant has married with her, now he is demanding dowry and on account of such demand he is torturing her with the help of his second wife Ruby. Police Station Kotwali Ayodhya,

7. Further attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R., which was lodged on 17.12.2024 for the alleged incident dated 17.12.2019 without explaining the aforesaid inordinate delay of about five years alleging that the present applicant has established physical relations with her on the pretext of false promise of marriage. He has been establishing relation with her in last six years.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that if both the aforesaid F.I.R.s are taken on its face value, the fact would emerge that the allegations so levelled against the present applicant are false and misconceived as well as are concocted also. She has further stated that the present applicant is aged about 25 years whereas the prosecutrix is aged about 35 years. Applicant is not having any previous criminal history. Charges sheet in this case has already been filed.

9. The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

10. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for aforesaid bail. He has submitted that earlier F.I.R., so far as his instructions are concerned, has been registered under Sections 115(2), 352 and 351(3) of B.N.S., 2023.

11. Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R.s, the fact that the present applicant has married with prosecutrix, now he is demanding dowry and on account of such demand he is torturing her with the help of his second wife Ruby. Applicant has established physical relations with her on the pretext of false promise of marriage and he has been establishing relation with her in last six years, applicant is languishing in jail since 22.12.2024 without any criminal antecedents and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

12. Bail application is allowed.

13. Let the applicant- Vishal Kumar, involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.may be issued and if the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned. (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 5.2.2025 Praveen PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. At the very outset, Ms. Divya Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant has requested that she may be permitted to delete the opposite party no.2 from the array of the opposite parties.

2. On the aforesaid request, she is permitted to delete the opposite party no.2 from the array of the opposite parties during the course of the day

3. Heard Ms. Divya Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Ran Vijay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

4. The present applicant- Vishal Kumar is in jail since 22.12.2024, in Case Crime No. 354 of 2024, under Sections 376, 504 and 506 of I.P.C. at Police Station Kotwali Cantt, District Ayodhya/Faizabad.

5. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 22.12.2024. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged.

6. The attention of this Court has drawn towards Annexure No. 2 of the bail application, which is an earlier F.I.R. being lodged by the same complainant/prosecutrix against the present applicant on 24.09.2024 in Case Crime No. 503 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3) and Section 85 of B.N.S., 2023, District Ayodhya/Faizabad, levelling allegations that the present applicant has married with her, now he is demanding dowry and on account of such demand he is torturing her with the help of his second wife Ruby. Police Station Kotwali Ayodhya,

7. Further attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R., which was lodged on 17.12.2024 for the alleged incident dated 17.12.2019 without explaining the aforesaid inordinate delay of about five years alleging that the present applicant has established physical relations with her on the pretext of false promise of marriage. He has been establishing relation with her in last six years.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that if both the aforesaid F.I.R.s are taken on its face value, the fact would emerge that the allegations so levelled against the present applicant are false and misconceived as well as are concocted also. She has further stated that the present applicant is aged about 25 years whereas the prosecutrix is aged about 35 years. Applicant is not having any previous criminal history. Charges sheet in this case has already been filed.

9. The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

10. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for aforesaid bail. He has submitted that earlier F.I.R., so far as his instructions are concerned, has been registered under Sections 115(2), 352 and 351(3) of B.N.S., 2023.

11. Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R.s, the fact that the present applicant has married with prosecutrix, now he is demanding dowry and on account of such demand he is torturing her with the help of his second wife Ruby. Applicant has established physical relations with her on the pretext of false promise of marriage and he has been establishing relation with her in last six years, applicant is languishing in jail since 22.12.2024 without any criminal antecedents and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

12. Bail application is allowed.

13. Let the applicant- Vishal Kumar, involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.may be issued and if the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned. (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 5.2.2025 Praveen PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench