High Court · 2025

Neither the learned counsel for the applicant nor the learned counsel for the complainant is present. Heard 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. 107 of 2024, under Sections 363,366 I.P.C., P.S.- Beniganj, District- Hardoi. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 30.4.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- " Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. The instant application has been preferred by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.107 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366 IPC, relating to police station Beniganj, District Hardoi. This is an anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant who submits that he has been falsely implicated in the case. As per the submission of learned counsel for the applicant there is some romantic relationship between the daughter of the complainant and the co- accused Harshit Arkvanshi even earlier the said girl had left her home and FIR had been lodged whereas before the Court in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C, the said girl had given statement that she was not happy with her parents and only under their persuasion and insistence she has given incorrect statement while lodging the FIR whereas the said boy had not misbehaved with her. The same has been brought on record which is part of the order granting bail to the co-accused Harshit Kumar Arkvanshi in Case Crime no.572 of 2023 under Sections 363, 366, 506 IPC and is on record as Annexure 4. It is further submitted that it is in the aforesaid context once again the present FIR has been filed by the parents of the girl wherein apart from co-accused Harshit Arkvanshi, the applicant has also been implicated though he is the uncle and does not reside with the family of the other co-accused. The applicant is based out of Lucknow and is working as a resolution agent for a number of banks and the said letters/certificates/documents have been brought on record as Annexure-5. It is further submitted that in order to unnecessarily harass the applicant and to humiliate in public the name of the applicant has been introduced though he has no role to play. In the aforesaid context the applicant is under an impending threat of being arrested and approached this Court for anticipatory bail. It is also stated that the applicant has no criminal history. It is further submitted that the applicant has cooperated during investigation and he has roots in the society and there is no apprehension that the applicant is at risk of fleeing from justice or influence any witness or tamper any evidence and rather the applicant undertakes to cooperate in the investigation as and when required, as such, he is entitled for benefit of anticipatory bail. Learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid the anticipatory bail could not dispute the fact. However, it is pointed out that the missing girl has yet not been recovered and the investigation is still in progress and also could not dispute the fact that the applicant is an ordinary resident of Lucknow whereas the alleged incident At this stage, where prima facie the applicant is said to be at station and based out of Lucknow and otherwise does not have any criminal history and link with the incident except the relation was of being uncle. At this stage, the interim protection can be granted to the applicant subject to cooperation in the investigation. Hardoi. District Let counter affidavit be filed within two weeks. Learned AGA shall specifically mention in the affidavit as to what efforts have been made by the Investigating Officer to recover the girl. List on 14.05.2024. As an interim measure, it is provided that till the next date of listing in the event of arrest of the applicant- Sujeet Kumar Singh involved in the above-noted case crime, he shall be enlarged on interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer, subject to the following conditions: (i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required; (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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court. " 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. It has also not been pleaded by counsel for the State that the present applicant is not cooperating with the trial proceedings. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant namely, Sujeet Kumar Singh, 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 :- 23.1.2025 Shravan SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Neither the learned counsel for the applicant nor the learned counsel for the complainant is present. Heard 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. 107 of 2024, under Sections 363,366 I.P.C., P.S.- Beniganj, District- Hardoi. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 30.4.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- " Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. The instant application has been preferred by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.107 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366 IPC, relating to police station Beniganj, District Hardoi. This is an anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant who submits that he has been falsely implicated in the case. As per the submission of learned counsel for the applicant there is some romantic relationship between the daughter of the complainant and the co- accused Harshit Arkvanshi even earlier the said girl had left her home and FIR had been lodged whereas before the Court in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C, the said girl had given statement that she was not happy with her parents and only under their persuasion and insistence she has given incorrect statement while lodging the FIR whereas the said boy had not misbehaved with her. The same has been brought on record which is part of the order granting bail to the co-accused Harshit Kumar Arkvanshi in Case Crime no.572 of 2023 under Sections 363, 366, 506 IPC and is on record as Annexure 4. It is further submitted that it is in the aforesaid context once again the present FIR has been filed by the parents of the girl wherein apart from co-accused Harshit Arkvanshi, the applicant has also been implicated though he is the uncle and does not reside with the family of the other co-accused. The applicant is based out of Lucknow and is working as a resolution agent for a number of banks and the said letters/certificates/documents have been brought on record as Annexure-5. It is further submitted that in order to unnecessarily harass the applicant and to humiliate in public the name of the applicant has been introduced though he has no role to play. In the aforesaid context the applicant is under an impending threat of being arrested and approached this Court for anticipatory bail. It is also stated that the applicant has no criminal history. It is further submitted that the applicant has cooperated during investigation and he has roots in the society and there is no apprehension that the applicant is at risk of fleeing from justice or influence any witness or tamper any evidence and rather the applicant undertakes to cooperate in the investigation as and when required, as such, he is entitled for benefit of anticipatory bail. Learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid the anticipatory bail could not dispute the fact. However, it is pointed out that the missing girl has yet not been recovered and the investigation is still in progress and also could not dispute the fact that the applicant is an ordinary resident of Lucknow whereas the alleged incident At this stage, where prima facie the applicant is said to be at station and based out of Lucknow and otherwise does not have any criminal history and link with the incident except the relation was of being uncle. At this stage, the interim protection can be granted to the applicant subject to cooperation in the investigation. Hardoi. District Let counter affidavit be filed within two weeks. Learned AGA shall specifically mention in the affidavit as to what efforts have been made by the Investigating Officer to recover the girl. List on 14.05.2024. As an interim measure, it is provided that till the next date of listing in the event of arrest of the applicant- Sujeet Kumar Singh involved in the above-noted case crime, he shall be enlarged on interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer, subject to the following conditions: (i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required; (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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court. " 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. It has also not been pleaded by counsel for the State that the present applicant is not cooperating with the trial proceedings. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant namely, Sujeet Kumar Singh, 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 :- 23.1.2025 Shravan SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench