Allahabad High Court
Deepak Shahi vs State Of U.P. on 21 December, 2022
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 75 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28506 of 2022 Applicant :- Deepak Shahi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manjeet Kumar,Abhishek Srivastava,Bebi Naz,Ram Sajiwan Prajapati,Sarvanand Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amrita Kashyap,Shams Uz Zaman Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Ambreesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Rakesh Soni, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Deepak Shahi with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 101 of 2022, under Section 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 67 Information Technology Act, Police Station- Pataherwa, District-Kushi Nagar, during pendency of trial.
The F.I.R. has been lodged by the informant on 30.3.2022 with the allegations that the applicant enticed away the victim and performed marriage with her. After one month they separated from each other on the basis of compromise. The victim is pursuing B.Sc. from Punjab. The informant has fixed the marriage of her daughter as per her wish with some other person. It is further alleged that on 25.3.2022, the applicant has posted objectionable photographs and messages on Facebook and social media and also sent the same to persons where her daughter's marriage has been fixed. The aforesaid objectionable, abusive as well as life threatening messages were also sent on the victim's mobile by the applicant from his mobile.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to pressure of parents. He submitted that the marriage of the victim was solemnized with the applicant on 15.3.2021 at Arya Samaj Temple and the same was registered on 16.3.2021. The applicant along with the victim approached this Court by means of Writ-C No. 10016 of 2021 for a direction upon the respondents not to interfere in their married life and the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 25.3.2021, granted protection to the applicant and the victim with a condition that they would get their marriage registered within a period of two months from that date.
In the aforesaid order, the date of birth of petitioner No.1/victim was mentioned as 2.3.2000 i.e. she was major at the time of her marriage.
In the statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. as well as 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has talked about of some incident of the year 2017 wherein objectionable photographs were captured as well as video was made by the applicant and by blackmailing for making the same viral, the victim was sexually exploited by the applicant. It has also been stated that she was forced to marry the applicant in the year 2021 and she was sexually exploited after marriage also as the applicant had promulgated that the objectionable photographs and video would be made viral by publishing the same in social media. It has also been stated that the applicant and victim were separated on the basis of some compromise between the two.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there are variations in the statements u/s 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. There is no compromise on record to show that the applicant-victim have separated from each other and till date no divorce has been filed. From the records, it is clear that there is no such indecent video or any photograph which has been captured by the applicant in compromising position with the victim or any such pictures showing that the applicant has sexually exploited the victim. The records also show that the applicant has not propagated any objectionable video on social media or has published the said video or any photographs in any manner or blackmailed the victim with the same.
The victim has refused to get herself medically examined which also shows that the present F.I.R. has been lodged to exert pressure upon the applicant for reasons best known to the informant. It appears that initially the victim ran away with the applicant and as her parents were not happy with her marriage with the applicant, therefore, she was forced to give such statement under pressure of her parents where there are glaring contradictions. As per her date of birth i.e. 2.3.2022, she was major at the time of the incident, there is nothing on record to show that the applicant had even established forceful physical relationship with the victim. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.4.2022. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.
Per contra learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant. Learned counsel for the informant has laid emphasis on the statements of the victim u/s 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. which speak about objectionable video and photographs being captured by the applicant for which the victim was blackmailed and sexually exploited.
Though the allegations are there regarding performance of marriage, however, the counsels could not dispute the fact that there is no video or any compromise on record to show the correctness of the allegations as detailed in the F.I.R. as well as statements of the victim.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Deepak Shahi, involved in aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(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. is issued and 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.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 21.12.2022 Vandana