Allahabad High Court
Manish Kumar Gautam And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. on 18 June, 2021
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 1 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11970 of 2021 Applicant :- Manish Kumar Gautam And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Srivastava,Noor Muhammad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
Heard Sri Noor Mohammad, learned counsel for applicants namely, Manish Kumar Gautam s/o Harveer Singh, Harveer Singh s/o Surajbhan Singh and Sudha Devi w/o Harveer Singh and Sri Janardan Prakash, learned AGA for the State.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants being aggrieved of registration of Case Crime No. 0015 of 2021 dated 24.03.2021 at Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Aligarh under Sections 376, 313, 506 IPC, showing that incident had taken place on 11.12.2020.
Learned counsel for applicants submits that allegation on the applicant no. 1 is that complainant was introduced to applicant no. 1 and they used to frequently talk on phone. On 11.12.2020, there was a program in the matrimonial home of sister of applicant at Nagla-Mansingh, where applicant had invited the complainant. Believing his words, she had visited Nagla-Mansingh on 11.12.2020, where Manish and Jyoti had forcefully stopped her when Manish had committed rape against her wishes. It is mentioned in the FIR that when the complainant cried, then Manish had assured her of marriage. Thereafter, on 25.02.2021, when complainant was not keeping good health, she checked her status through a pregnancy kit, when she found herself to be pregnant and when she informed this fact to the applicant no. 1- Manish and asked him to marry her soon, he called her on 27.02.2021 at Ambedkar Park, Tedi Bagiya, where it is alleged that mother of Manish namely, Sudha Devi had offered complainant a cold drink and her father asked Manish to bring a tablet from the medical shop. After sometime, Manish had given her tablet and the three accused persons assured her of marriage and left the park. It is complainant's assertions in the FIR that when she reached home, she started bleeding, as a result, she had met Dr. Geeta Yadav on 01.03.2021, who on conducting an ultrasound, informed her that some pieces of the fetus remained undischarged consequent to abortion. In this background, FIR was lodged.
Learned counsel for applicants submits that this is a false and concocted story. There is no preservation of so called remains of the fetus, so to verify as to whether the pregnancy was contracted from Manish or not. No D.N.A. test is possible at this stage and the whole story is concocted, inasmuch as, as per the medical evidence immediately upon consuming a tablet for abortion, bleeding will not start on the same day.
It is also submitted that it is true that there were talks of marriage between the two families, but when ex-boyfriend of the complainant had sent certain photographs of the complainant in a compromising position with the said ex-boyfriend, which has been annexed by the applicant, then he had dropped the idea and had informed the complainant that he is not willing to marry her in view of such photographs. It is also submitted that there is past record of the complainant of registering false cases against different persons, as can be seen from copy of the FIR, registering Case Crime No. 926 of 2016 at Police Station-Itimaddaulah, District-Agra under Sections 452, 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC against another co-accused persons namely, Sonu, Ratan Devi, Pradeep and Bhobhan.
Taking this Court through the available material, it is submitted that none of the applicants have any criminal history and there is no explanation for delay in the FIR and it is merely an attempt to coerce the applicant nos. 1, 2 and 3 to accept wedding proposal, made by the complainant as she is desperate to marry the applicant no. 1.
Learned AGA, admits that there is no explanation for delay in the FIR. It is also admitted that earlier also in the year 2016, complainant had lodged FIR against a different set of persons. It is also admitted on the basis of the case diary that there is no document to show preservation of parts of fetus to confirm the allegation of the complainant that she was pregnant from Manish.
In view of such facts and not taking cognizance of recording of earlier FIR, inasmuch as, that may be a fortuitous circumstance, in the light of the complainant, this Court is of the opinion that prima facie a case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out in favour of the applicants. Looking to the facts of the case, taking into consideration the gravity and nature of accusation and there being no possibility of their fleeing from process of justice delivery, this Court is of the view that applicants are entitled for anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, let applicants namely, Manish Kumar Gautam ,Harveer Singh and Sudha Devi implicated in the aforesaid case be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 themself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required, by approaching said police officer within 30 days from today.
(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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(v) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(vi) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above or in case it is found that applicants have obtained this order concealing any material facts, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.
In above terms, case is disposed off.
Order Date :- 18.6.2021 Vikram/-