Allahabad High Court
Karan Pal Singh @ Guddu vs State Of Up And 3 Others on 23 April, 2024
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:70755 Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 719 of 2024 Applicant :- Karan Pal Singh @ Guddu Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Singh Tomar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sonu Kumar Tiwari Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Mr S. K Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
2. Pursuant to earlier order of this court dated 19.4.2024, applicant and the victim are present before this court and they have been duly identified by their counsels. The victim denied to go with the appicant.
3. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Complaint Case No. 153 of 2022, (Asha Chaudhary Vs Karan Pal Singh @ Guddu and others), under Section 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, 2012, P.S. Khair, District Aligarh.
4. As per the allegations made in the complaint as well as the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., it is alleged that on 28.11.2014 at about 1:00 p.m. Devaki, sister of applicant informed the victim that applicant along with Amit has come at her house and is calling her and had taken the victim along with her maternal sister Seema to her house and thereafter locked her inside and left her with the applicant and co-accused Amit, who were present in the house. After sometime, co accused Amit on the pretext of making tea had taken Seema in the kitchen and locked the applicant and victim in a room and the applicant forcibly committed rape upon her, however, the victim did not disclose this fact to anyone except her mother, who under the fear of earning bad reputation did not disclose this fact to anyone. It is further alleged that on the said date of incident, the victim was a minor girl aged about 15 years. It is further alleged that on 20.09.2021, applicant along with other co accused persons again called her at her house and illegally detained her and applicant is said to have further forcibly committed rape upon her. On disclosing this fact to the other family members of the applicant, they started hurling abuses and assaulted the victim.
5. On the basis of the said allegations, the instant complaint was filed and the learned Magistrate recorded the statement of the victim under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and that of her witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and after recording the statements summoned applicant under Section 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) vide order dated 15.03.2023.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He next submits that on the complaint filed by opposite party no. 2, the applicant and others have been summoned vide order dated 15.03.2023. It is further submitted that the complaint was made on 22.11.2022 against six persons including the applicant and the applicant has been summoned after nine years of the incident. It is further submitted that against the said summoning order, applicant and others preferred application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. being Criminal Misc Application No. 37590 of 2023, which came to be dismissed on 30.10.2023. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, no offence is disclosed against the applicant and the present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. It is further submitted that subsequently after the said offence on 28.11.2014, applicant had married the victim on 28.02.2016 and after the said marriage for some time, the victim has even stayed with applicant as his wife, however subsequently, she left applicant. Thereafter, applicant is said to have also filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights before the Principal Judge/ Family Court, Hathras on 09.07.2020, which is still pending disposal.
7. It is further submitted that earlier on 6.7.2018, mother of the victim has also filed an application under Sectin156(3) Cr.P.C. against the applicant and his other family members under section 376, 506 IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, which came to be dismissed on 19.08.2018 and thereafter mother of the victim challenged the said order before this Court by filing Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 45151 of 2018, in which notices have been issued to the applicant and other family members vide order dated 12.12.2018 and the said case is still pending.
8. It is further submitted that as per school leaving certificate wherein the date of birth of the victim is mentioned as 20.06.1996 as per which she was major on the date of incident. It is further submitted that the applicant made consensual physical relations with the victim and subsequently married her on 28.02.2016, therefore, offence under Section 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act is not made out against applicant. It is further submitted that the victim in her statement under Section200 Cr.P.C. has herself admitted that physical relations were made with her consent. It is further submitted that the entire allegation against the applicant is false and concocted. There is no credible evidence against him. The applicant undertakes to co-operate during proceedings before the Court below and trial and he would appear as and when required by the Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during proceedings before the Court below and would obey all conditions of bail.
9. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. However, after going through the deposition of the prosecutrix and other prosecution witnesses, it is fairly conceded that either the complaint has been lodged by the informant falsely implicating the applicant or the victim and other witnesses have not narrated the truth before the Court, therefore, they are liable to be prosecuted under Section 344 Cr.P.C.
10. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1. The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
11. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed.
12. Let the accused-applicant Karan Pal Singh @ Guddu be released forthwith in the aforesaid complaint case on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
3. 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;
4. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicants.
5. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.
6. 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against them in accordance with law."
13. With the aforesaid directions, this application stands disposed of finally. So far as the contention of learned AGA for the State that the informant as well as victim are liable for prosecution is concerned, the trial Court is directed to deal with this aspect at the time of final hearing and shall pass necessary order in this regard.
Order Date :- 23.4.2024 RavindraKSingh