Allahabad High Court
Chandra Bhooshan Singh @ Prabhuji vs State Of U.P. on 14 February, 2025
Author: Sanjay Kumar Singh
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21183 Reserved on 31.01.2025 Delivered on 14.02.2025 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37625 of 2024 Applicant :- Chandra Bhooshan Singh @ Prabhuji Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Hemendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anil Kumar Singh Bishen,G.A.,Saurabh Basu Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
1-The instant bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 421 of 2024, under Sections 328, 376(2)n and 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Shivpur, District-Varanasi, during the pendency of trial.
2-Details of counter and rejoinder affidavits filed in the matter are as under:-
(i)-Initially counter affidavit dated 07.11.2024 was filed on behalf of the State, against which accused applicant filed rejoinder affidavit.
(ii)-Counter affidavit dated 13.11.2024 was filed on behalf of the complainant, against which accused applicant filed rejoinder affidavit dated 17.11.2024.
(iii)-Since the aforesaid counter affidavits of the State and complainant were not properly drafted, therefore, at the request made on their behalf, they were allowed to file better counter affidavit vide order dated 02.12.2024.
(iv)-Thereafter, State has filed better counter affidavit dated 09.12.2024, in reply thereto, the accused applicant filed rejoinder affidavit dated 12.12.2024.
(v)-Complainant has filed better counter affidavit dated 08.12.2024, in reply thereto, the accused applicant filed rejoinder affidavit dated 12.12.2024.
3-Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant / complainant at length.
4-In short compass, the facts of the case are that the police has registered a first information report of the complainant on 20.09.2024 at 01:25 AM against the applicant for the alleged offence of rape which is alleged to have taken place more than two years ago, wherein complainant has alleged inter-alia that her husband Vikas Kumar used to worship of a Baba named Chandra Bhooshan Singh alias Prabhu Ji, who keeps changing his Ashram and place from time to time. Her husband introduced her to Chandra Bhooshan Singh alias Prabhu Ji in the year 2019 in his ashram, where he was giving sermons. Since she is having faith in God, she started attending his sermons. Applicant managed a room for her and her husband in the Ashram located in Shivpur, Varanasi. In August, 2022 Prabhu Ji deceitfully mixed intoxicants in the Prasad and fed it to her, then she became semi-conscious. Taking advantage of the situation, he committed rape upon her. She could not resist as she was semi-conscious. When she regained consciousness, applicant threatened her that if she tells anything to anyone, he would get her, her children and husband eliminated and also get her husband implicated in a false case and get him to send jail due to which she got scared. Thereafter, Prabhu Ji raped her forcefully several times, but she remained silent to save her and her family's life. When Prahu Ji started blackmailing her, then she told every thing to her husband. Since August 2022, she is staying at different place along with her husband to save their lives. Meanwhile complainant/victim came to know that Prabhu Ji raped several women in the name of rituals and several victim filed case against him, only then she mustered courage and moved an application against him.
5-The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are as under :-
5.1-The applicant is a trustee of the trust 'Aadhyatmik Aashram' at Varanasi established by him in the year 2017 prior to the alleged incident and is having command over spiritual yoga, therefore, many people are attached to the applicant to learn yoga. The said trust was registered on 25.05.2017 in the office of Sub-Registrar-IV, Varanasi. The amended trust deed was also registered on 08.08.2019, in which following 14 persons are members, holding different posts in trust, which are as under :-
i. Chandra Bhooshan Singh @ Prabhuji (applicant / founder and president of trustee).
ii. Smt. Mani Singh (wife of the applicant / Vice President).
iii. Smt. Babita Singh (Secretary).
iv. Smt. Aanchal Singh (Deputy Secretary / complainant).
v. Smt. Swati Singh (Treasurer).
vi. Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh (Member).
Vii. Mr. Sanjay Singh (Member).
viii. Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh (Member).
ix. Mr. Shailesh Singh (Member).
x. Smt. Priya Singh (Member).
xi. Smt. Vidhya Singh (Member).
xii. Mr. Shuman Singh (Member).
xiii. Mr. Vikas (Member/husband of the complainant).
xiv. Mr. Brijesh Kumar Singh (Member).
The copy of the registered deed dated 08.08.2019 has been brought on record as Annexure No. 2 to the bail application.
5.2-Mr. Sanjay Singh, whose name has find place at serial no. vii of the trust deed dated 08.08.2019 was looking after the Finance and Administration of the said trust has misappropriated the funds of the trust behind the back of the applicant, for which he was scolded by the applicant and ousted from the said trust. Thereafter, Sanjay Singh and his associates have threatened the applicant for dire consequences, after which applicant in anticipation of his false implication, sent his complaints dated 21.10.2023, 14.03.2024 and 22.07.2024 to the Superintendent of Police (Commissioner of Police), Varanasi by speed-post for hatching a criminal conspiracy by Sanjay Singh, Babita Singh, Aanchal Singh (victim), Sudhir Kumar Singh, Swati Singh and their associates to falsely implicate the applicant, but no action has been taken by the Commissioner of Police, Varanasi in the matter.
5.3-On account of said financial dispute of trust, Sanjay Singh (Member of the trust), who is master mind of this case, in order to settle his personal score, started hatching a conspiracy to falsely implicate the applicant and to lower down his reputation in the society. In this regard, it is pointed out that Sanjay Singh got a first information report lodged on 12.04.2023 through Swati Singh wife of Deepak Kumar, who are Treasurer and Member of the trust respectively, which was registered at Case Crime No. 0159 of 2023 for the alleged offence under Sections 354-Ka, 354-Kha, 354, 506, 504, 323, 147, 406 and 420 I.P.C. at Police Station Shivpur, District Varanasi against Chandra Bhooshan Singh (applicant), Mitesh Khotari and 8-10 disciples. Then applicant preferred a Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application Under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No. 9663 of 2023, which was disposed of vide order dated 22.09.2023 of this Court granting protection to the applicant in accordance with Section 41-A Cr.P.C. in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Another, (2014) 8 SCC 273.
5.4-Thereafter, Mr. Sanjay Singh (Member of the trust) got another first information report lodged through his wife Smt. Babita Singh (Secretary of the trust) against the applicant-Chandra Bhooshan Singh, Nand Lal and Aalisha, which was registered at Case Crime No. 0188 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 420, 406, 506 and 376 I.P.C. at Police Station Shivpur, District Varanasi (Commissionerate Varanasi), in which also during investigation, applicant was granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 25.08.2023 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 9689 of 2023 and after submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., applicant has again preferred Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 4907 of 2024, in which also interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the applicant vide order dated 08.07.2024 which was extended from time to time and the matter is still pending.
5.5-After granting above anticipatory bails to the applicant, the aforesaid rival group of the applicant taking the concerned Police Officers in confidence, made a plan to first arrest the applicant and then lodged F.I.R. and in order to execute the said plan the police personnel, who were in collusion with rival group of the applicant, came at the house of the applicant on 19.09.2024 at 10:30 pm and arrested him, whereas at that time, no F.I.R. was in-existence. With regard to said illegal arrest of the applicant, it is further submitted that a call was also made on 19.09.2024 at 22:44:23 to mobile police by dialling helpline no. 112 from mobile no. 8471061846 of Nitesh Kothari. In order to give strength to his his submission, learned counsel for applicant also produced a copy of an information received under the right of information Act, which is extracted herein below:-
5.6-Apart from the aforesaid fact, to establish the factum of illegal arrest of the applicant by police personnel in the night of 19.09.2024 from his house as well as F.I.R. is anti-dated and anti-timed, learned counsel for the applicant also placed reliance upon some CCTV footage / photographs of residential Society, in which applicant's house is situated, which have been brought on record as annexure nos. 1 and 2 of rejoinder affidavit dated 07.11.2024. Much emphasis has been given by contending that despite best effort made from the side of the applicant, the investigating officer did not take these important evidence and in order to save the skin of police personnel, who were involved in illegal arrest of the applicant, has neither made any investigation in this regard nor made the same as part of case diary.
5.7-After illegal arrest of the applicant on 19.09.2024 at 10:30 pm, a false first information report of the alleged victim Aanchal Singh was registered on 20.09.2024 at 01:20 AM at Case Crime No. 0124 of 2024 for the alleged offence under Section 328, 376 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Shivpur, District Varanasi after two years of the alleged offence of rape, which according to the complainant took place in the month of August, 2022.
5.8-At this stage, much emphasis has been given by contending that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case on account of financial dispute of trust.
5.9- There is no plausible explanation of inordinate delay of more than two years in getting the F.I.R. lodged.
5.10- It is also pointed out that the complainant neither in F.I.R. nor in her statement recorded during investigation has disclosed the specific date and time of alleged incident of rape.
5.11- Complainant has also made allegation that under the threat, applicant committed rape on her several times, but for the alleged repeated act of rape also, she neither in the F.I.R. nor during the investigation, disclosed the specific date, time and place of alleged incident of rape. Even she has not disclosed that on which date she told everything to her husband.
5.12- Referring the F.I.R. it has also argued that as per own averment of the victim that in August, 2022 victim along with her husband started living secretly at different places, hence, the allegation of the victim that after August, 2022 also applicant committed rape on her is false on the face of record itself. Victim also did not disclose her address, where she was living with her husband after August 2022. The investigating officer also did not take pain to investigate the said allegation of the complainant.
5.13-Referring the medical examination report of the victim, it is also submitted that the victim was medically examined on 20.09.2024 at 12:45 PM and her medico legal report was prepared by Dr. Sonal Tripathi, District Women Hospital, Varanasi, wherein in the column of description, it is mentioned NAD "not prepared because case is old according to the victim is of August 2022" and as such, except the false allegation of the victim in the F.I.R and in her statement, recorded during investigation, there is no corroborative material against the applicant in support of the allegation of complainant.
5.14- So far as the fact as stated by the complainant in the F.I.R. that the applicant had managed a room in Aashram is concerned, it is submitted that said fact is also false and against the evidence on record. Referring the rent agreement between Sanjay Singh and Vikas Kumar (husband of the victim) dated 06.08.2019 which has been brought on record as Annexure No. RA-II to the rejoinder affidavit dated 12.12.2024, it is pointed out that in fact complainant was tenant of Sanjay Singh with effect from 01.07.2019 and in the said rent agreement dated 06.08.2019, complainant-Aanchal Singh is also one of the witness.
5.15-It is also argued that all the complainants against the applicant are related to each other. In this regard, it is submitted that Smt. Swati Singh, who has lodged F.I.R. of Case Crime No. 0159 of 2023 against the applicant is treasurer of the trust and is bhabhi of the complainant-Aanchal Singh (Deputy Secretary of the trust) and Smt. Babita Singh (Secretary of the trust) who lodged the F.I.R. of Case Crime No. 188 of 2023 at Police Station Shivpur District Varanasi is wife of Mr. Sanjay Singh (Member of the trust) and sister-in-law of the complainant of this case.
5.16-A joint family photograph of Smt. Babita Singh, Smt. Swati Singh and complainant-Anchal Singh and photograph of Vikas Singh (husband of complaint) with Brijesh Singh, Shailesh Singh, Sudhir Kumar Singh (Sub-Inspector) and Sanjay Singh as well as a joint photograph of Sanjay Singh, Nishant Singh (son of Sanjay Singh), Brijesh Singh, Shailesh Singh (nephew of Sanjay Singh) and Vikas Kumar (husband of the complainant) have also been brought on record as annexure no. RA-1 with the rejoinder affidavit dated 12.12.2024.
5.17- Referring the conduct of the rival Group, it is submitted that during the pendency of this bail application, the aforesaid rival group in order to cause irreparable loss and injury to the applicant also got a first information report lodged through Sushma Singh (member of trust) wife of Sudhir Kumar Singh on 25.10.2024 registered at Case Crime No. 0501 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 328, 354 and 506 I.P.C. against the applicant and unknown deciples, in which applicant has been granted bail vide order dated 16.11.2024 of the trial court.
5.18- It is further submitted that Sanjay Singh through his tenant had also got a F.I.R. lodged against the applicant, which was registered at case crime no. 305 of 2022 under Section 376(2)n I.P.C. but later on complainant filed her affidavit that she was mis-guided by Sanjay Singh and others. Now she does not want to prosecute the applicant. The investigation of the said case is still pending.
5.19- Much emphasis has been given by pointing out that one Bhawana Singh was also being compelled and pressurised to lodge F.I.R. against the applicant and she was beaten also. She made an effort to lodged F.I.R. in this regard but her F.I.R. was not lodged by the police, then she has approached the Court by filling an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., which was allowed vide order dated 08.08.2024, thereafter F.I.R. of Bhawana Singh was registered on 04.09.2024 at case crime no.383 of 2024 under Sections 147, 323, 452 and 506 IPC at police station Shivpur, District Varanasi against Baba, Sanjay Kumar Singh, Babita Singh, Nishant Singh, Shivam Singh Swati Singh, Dharm Dev Singh and Arbind Kumar. The contents of F.I.R. are reproduced as under :-
"नकल तहरीर हिन्दी वादिनी-----------न्यायालय श्रीमान् मुख्य न्यायिक मजिस्ट्रेट वाराणसी प्रा०प०सं० सन् भावना सिंह पुत्री दीपक कुमार सिंह निवासिनी प्लाट नं0 सी-27 अयोध्या धाम कालोनी थाना शिवपुर जिला वाराणसी। प्रार्थिनी बनाम 1. बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह पुत्र स्व० मार्कण्डेय सिंह निवासी मकान नं0 एस0एच0 5/155 सी-10, मोहल्ला लक्ष्मनपुर, थाना शिवपुर, जिला वाराणसी। 2. बबिता सिंह पत्नी बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह निवासी मकान नं0 एस.एच. 5/155 सी-10, मोहल्ला लक्ष्मनपुर, थाना शिवपुर, जिला वाराणसी। 3. निशात सिंह उर्फ शिवम 4. शीतांशु सिंह उर्फ सत्यम पुत्रगण बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह निवासी- मकान नं0 एस.एच. 5/155 सी-10, मोहल्ला लक्ष्मनपुर, थाना शिवपुर, जिला, 5. स्वाती सिंह पुत्री धर्मदेव सिंह पत्नी दीपक कुमार सिंह निवासी प्लाट नं0 सी-27 अयोध्या धाम कालोनी, थाना शिवपुर, जिला वाराणसी। 6. धर्मदेव सिंह पुत्र अज्ञात (प्रार्थिनी के नाना) निवासी गुरेरा, थाना चहनिया, पोस्ट चहनिया जिला चन्दौली 7. अरविन्द कुमार वर्मा पुत्र अज्ञात निवासी थाना शिवपुर, वाराणसी, उत्तर प्रदेश उप निरीक्षक पद पर नियुक्त। .... अभियुक्तगण प्रार्थना पत्र अन्तगर्त धारा 156 (3) सी०आर०पी०सी० थाना-शिवपुर वाराणसी। जरिये सनरक्षक पिता दीपक कुमार सिंह पुत्र शिवशंकर सिंह निवासी म0नं0-एस.एस. 5/155 सी-10, मोहल्ला लक्ष्मनपुर, थाना शिवपुर, जिला वाराणसी। प्रार्थिनी निम्न निवेदन करती है- 1. यह कि प्रार्थिनी भावना सिंह जन्म तिथि 10.02.2008 उम्र 15 साल पुत्री दीपक कुमार सिंह जो कि फौजी है वर्तमान सियाचिन ग्लेशियर में नियुक्त है वर्तमान पता प्लाट नम्बर सी-27 अयोध्या धाम कालोनी थाना शिवपुर, वाराणसी हम प्रार्थिनी पहले अपने सगे फुफा बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह पुत्र स्व० मार्कण्डेय सिंह पता मकान नं0 एस.एच. 5/155 सी-10, मोहल्ला लक्ष्मनपुर, थाना शिवपुर, जिला वाराणसी जो कि एक तांत्रिक बाबा है, के यहा प्रार्थिनी सपरिवार जिसमें सगा छोटा भाई सुभाष सिंह मम्मी स्वाती सिंह पुत्री धर्मदेव सिंह पापा उपरोक्त दीपक कुमार सिंह और दादा साथ में रहते थे। बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह, बबिता सिंह जो कि बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह को पत्नी है और इनके दोनो बेटे क्रमशः निशांत सिंह उर्फ शिवम, शीतांशु सिंह उर्फ सत्यम विगत कई महीनों से चन्द्रभूषण सिंह (प्रभुजी) पुत्र स्व० मार्कण्डेय सिंह के पैसे का घोटाला छिपाने और पैसा ववूल करके अपना कर्ज चुकाने के आशय से झूठे आरोप लगाने की योजना बना रहे थे फिर आरोप भी लगाया। प्रार्थिनी की मम्मी उपरोक्त स्वाती सिह का तंत्र मंत्र से वशीकरण करके बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह अपने गिरोह में शामिल कर लिया है और उनसे चन्द्रभूषण सिंह (प्रभुजी) पर झूठा केस भी करवाया है। बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह और उसका परिवार अपने गिरोह में शामिल करने के लिये हम प्रार्थिनी को चन्दभूषण सिंह (प्रभुजी) पर झूठे संगीन आरोप लगाने के लिए दुष्प्रेरित कर रहे थे जिससे चन्दभूषण सिंह (प्रभुजी) पर पोक्सो (POCSO) एक्ट लगाया जा सके और उनसे पैसे वसूले जा सके। जब प्रार्थिनी ने मना कर दिया तब उपरोक्त बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह ओर इसके बेटे क्रमशः निशांत सिंह उर्फ शिवम, शीतांशू सिंह उर्फ सत्यम ने प्रार्थिनी को शारीरिक और मानसिक रूप से प्रताणित करना प्रारम्भ किया जो कि दिसम्बर 2022 से वर्तमान समय तक कर ही रहे है। उपरोक्त बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह और इनके दोनो बेटों ने मिलकर प्रार्थिनी को बहुत मारा-पिटा प्रार्थिनी के बाल पकड़ कर घसीटे और कांटेदार चम्मच (फोक) से जान से मारने की कोशिश किए। प्रार्थिनी की मम्मी उपरोक्त स्वाती सिंह भी घटना स्थल पर उपस्थित थी वो हम प्रार्थिनी की नहीं सुनी बल्कि हम प्रार्थिनी को ही डाटा की तुम ही गलत हो और बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह और उसके परिवार का ही साथ दी, जब प्रार्थिनी इस वारदात को सार्वजनिक करने की बात कही तब उसके भोजन में विष (जहर) डालकर मारने की धमकी दी गई। जब प्रार्थिनी ने उपरोक्त घटना अपने पापा उपरोक्त दीपक कुमार सिंह को बताया तब उन्होंने अपने परिवार को वर्तमाना पते पर स्थानातरित (शिफ्ट) करवा दिया, तब प्रार्थिनी की मम्मी ने यहां भी हम प्रार्थिनी को मारा-पीटा फिर प्रार्थिनी की दादी उसकी सुरक्षा के लिए साथ रहने आई तब बाबा संजय सिंह के कहने पर प्रार्थिनी के मम्मी के द्वारा दादी को मारा गया और दादा को विषाक्त खाना देने से वो बीमार हो गए और हस्पिटल आई.सी.यू. में भर्ती होने के बाद अपने गांव चले गए। वर्तमान पते पर आ जाने के बाद भी उपरोक्त बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह और उसके दोनों लड़के निशात सिंह उर्फ शिवम, शीतांशु सिंह उर्फ सत्यम प्रार्थिनी के घर में रात्रि में घुसकर हम प्रार्थिनी को मारा और प्रार्थिनी के बाल पकड़ कर सर को मार्बल पर कई बार पटका बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह के कहने पर प्रार्थिनी की मम्मी द्वारा प्रार्थिनी के पापा उपरोक्त दीपक कुमार सिंह पर झूठा केस व आरोप लगाकर कोर्ट मार्शल करवाने का प्रयास किया गया और पापा को दुष्प्रेरित किया कि तुम जल्दी मर क्यों नहीं जाते जिससे तुम्हारी पूरी पेंशन मुझे मिल जायेगी तत्पश्चात् प्रार्थिनी के पिता दीपक कुमार सिंह आत्महत्या करने जा रहे थे लेकिन हम प्रार्थिनी के समझाने पर विचार बदले कि बाबा सजय कुमार सिंह सिंह द्वारा धमकी दी गयी कि यदि तुम और तुम्हारे पापा हमारे गिरोह में नहीं आते तो हम तुम्हे और तुम्हारे पापा को जेल करवा देंगे। और हमारी पहुच बहुत उपर पुलिस थाने और गुण्डे माफियाओं तक है हम उंचे रसुख वाले व्यक्ति है हमारा कोई कुछ नही कर सकता। 2. यह कि प्रार्थिनी के नाना धर्मदेव सिंह पुत्र अज्ञात पता निवासी ग्राम गुरेरा थाना चहनिया पोस्ट चहनिया जिला चन्दौली उ०प्र० प्रार्थिनी के मम्मी उपरोक्त स्वाती सिंह और बाबा संजय कुमार सिंह के गिरोह का साथ दे रहे है। और सभी अपराध को क्रियान्वित करने में बराबर के हिस्सेदार हैं। ये बहुत ही घृणा एवं संगीन अपराध है इनका गिरोह है जो किसी पर झूठे आरोप लगाकर मुकदमे में फंसाते है और मनमानी तरीके से पैसा वसूलने का कार्य करते है। 3. यह कि प्रार्थिनी ने इलाका, थाना पर दिनांक 17.10.2023 को एक प्रार्थना पत्र पिता दीपक कुमार सिंह के माध्यम से दिया और एक स्पीड पोस्ट के माध्यम से दिया थाने पर प्रार्थिनी का बयान नहीं लिया गया ना ही कोई कार्यवाही की गयी और थाने से स्पीड पोस्ट के प्रार्थना पत्र को वायरल करके प्राथमिकी दर्ज करने के पहले ही विपक्षियों को दे दिया गया। ए.सी.पी. आफिस और महिला आयोग में भी प्रार्थना पत्र दिया गया पर उस पर भी कोई कार्यवाही नहीं किया गया।4. यह कि प्रार्थिनी द्वारा दिये गये आई.जी.आर.एस. सं0-20019723025596 दिनाक 28.10.2023 के अनुसार थाना शिवपुर के स्थानीय विवेचक महोदय द्वारा कार्यवाही रिपोर्ट पूरी तरह से झूठा है केवल मनगढंत तथा भ्रामक कथनों पर आधारित है, जिसका उक्त प्रकरण से कोई सम्बन्ध नहीं है। 5. यह कि विवेचक महादेव द्वारा रिपोर्ट लगाते समय रिपोर्ट में दिखाये है कि प्रार्थिनी से बात किया परन्तु ऐसा कुछ भी नहीं हुआ है तथा प्रार्थिनी से विवेचक महोदय का कोई बात या मुलाकात नहीं है। 6. यह कि प्रार्थिनी के उक्त प्रकरण के सम्बन्ध में थाना शिवपुर के स्थानीय विवेचनाधिकारी द्वारा प्रतिवादीगण/विपक्षीगण से सम्पर्क करके फर्जी/झूठा रिपोर्ट संलग्न कर दिया है जबकि प्रार्थिनी/वादिनी से कोई सम्पर्क नहीं हुआ। 7. यह कि प्रार्थिनी के उक्त प्रकरण में किसी भी प्रकार का कोई प्रसाशनिक कार्यवाही नहीं हो पा रही हैं तथा प्रार्थिनी काफी थक हारकर माननीय न्यायालय के यहां प्रार्थना पत्र दाखिल कर रही है लिहाजा प्रार्थिनी के उक्त प्रक्रण के सम्बन्ध में किसी सक्षम अधिकारी द्वारा विवेचना करवा कर सुसंगत धाराओं में मुकदमा पंजीकृत किया जाना आवश्यक तथा न्याय सगत है। प्रार्थन अतएव माननीय न्यायालय से प्रार्थना है कि प्रार्थिनी के प्रार्थना पत्र को संज्ञान में लेते हुए सक्षम अधिकारी द्वारा विवेचना कर सुसंगत धाराओं में मुकदमा पंजीकृत करने की कृपा करें ताकि न्याय होवे।"
5.20-On the strength of aforesaid submissions, it is submitted that several FIRs have been lodged against the applicant only to grab the property of the trust with an ulterior motive on the false and concocted story. In fact no such incident took place as alleged in the F.I.R.
5.21- Investigating officer has not conducted fair investigation, whereas proper investigation is one of the essentials of the criminal justice system and an integral facet of rule of law.
5.22- Explaining the criminal history of the applicant, it is pointed out that apart from aforesaid three criminal cases lodged against the applicant after financial dispute of trust, two cases were also lodged against the applicant being case crime no. 68 of 2010 under Sections 323,504 and 506 I.P.C. at police Station- Luxa, District Varanasi on the basis of Non Cognizable Report, in which earlier compromise took place but subsequently on account of dispute with Sanjay Singh, who had taken surety/ bail of the applicant, got the order-sheet changed and in this regard inquiry is going on by registering Misc. Case No.1749 of 2024 before the concerned Court below. A complainant case no.7135 of 2016 was also lodged against the applicant, which was dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C.
5.23-Referring the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Prabhakar Tiwari vs. State of U.P. and Another (2020) 11 SCC 648, it is argued that in the said case, Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that mere pendency of several criminal cases against an accused may itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail.
5.24-Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 20.09.2024 and in case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial.
6-Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by reiterating the prosecution case as mentioned in the F.I.R. date 20.09.2024.They next submit that the delay in lodging F.I.R. has been explained by the victim that due to fear she along with her husband were changing places to save their lives but when she came to know that other women filed case against applicant, only then she lodged F.I.R. against applicant on 20.09.2024 at 01:25 AM. Since allegation against the applicant is serious in nature, therefore he was immediately arrested by the police near V.D.A. colony, Varanasi on 20.09.2024 at 11:30AM. At the time of arrest of the applicant, five mobile phone were recovered from his possession, which were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Ramnagar, Varanasi, which were received there on 01.10.2024. So far as stand of the applicant that he was arrested prior to lodging F.I.R. is concerned, it is argued that no such CCTV footage have been provided by the accused during investigation, hence no reliance can be placed on the same. The applicant has three residences, where in all such places he carries out his illegal activities. The applicant has formed a trust and has given various feature of trust, which shows that he was doing all kind of illegal activities and in the garb of trust, he has spoiled the life of many women. F.I.R. was lodged in mid night because victim was not ready to go to the police station even in day light due to fear of the applicant. Victim was introduced to the applicant by her husband, but she was not aware about the misdeed of the applicant, later on she came to know about the character of the appicant when he committed rape on her in August 2022, hence, delay of two years is not fatal for the prosecution. Referring the contents of clause 8 of trust deed dated 08.08.2019, it is also submitted that if any member is found guilty of any offence, then he/she shall be removed from the trust, but no such procedure was ever followed. No member has made signature on the amended deed dated 08.08.2019. Complainant was included in the trust without informing him. Only applicant is signatory in the bank account of trust and he receives the donation directly in his account, therefore allegation of financial misappropriation of fund of trust by other members is false. The applicant is habitual offender. During investigation on 05.10.2024, Section 376(2)n I.P.C. was added, after submission of charge sheet against the applicant, therefore, bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected.
7-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that it is not in dispute that applicant has formed a trust which was registered on 25.05.2017 in the office of Sub-Registrar-IV, Varanasi. The amended trust deed was also registered on 08.08.2019. The complainants and their husband are also associated with the said trust, in different capacity holding different post. After dispute of trust, the applicant sent complainants to the police authorities apprehending his false implication by the rival group. The contents of paragraph no.37 of bail application, regarding fact of sending several complainants by the applicant against the rival group of trust as noted above to the police authorities in anticipation of his false implication have not been denied either by the state or the complainant. F.I.R. of Case Crime No. 0159 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 354-Ka, 354-Kha, 354, 506, 504, 323, 147, 406 and 420 I.P.C. which alleged to have taken place in the year 2019-20 was lodged against the applicant on 12.04.2023 by Swati Singh wife of Deepak Kumar, who are Treasurer and Member respectively of the trust. F.I.R. of Case Crime No. 0188 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 420, 406, 506 and 376 I.P.C.which alleged to have taken place on 11.03.2020 was lodged against the applicant-Chandra Bhooshan Singh on 30.04.2023 by Smt. Babita Singh, who is Secretary of the trust. Similarly F.I.R. of the present case being Case Crime No. 421 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 328, 376 and 506 I.P.C.which alleged to have taken place in August 2022 was lodged against the applicant-Chandra Bhooshan Singh on 20.09.2024 by Smt. Anchal Singh, who is Dy. Secretary of the trust. All the complainants are also related / acquainted to each other. From the information received to the applicant under the right of information Act, as noted above, prima facie, I find force in the submission made on behalf of the applicant that he was apprehended by the police prior to registration of F.I.R. and in this regard a call was also made on 19.09.2024 at 22:44:23 to mobile police by dialling helpline no. 112 from mobile no.8471061846 of Nitesh Kothari. Though the said information is not part of case diary, but it is a government document based upon reliable evidence and issued by a statutory authority, therefore same cannot be ignored. Specific date and time of alleged incident of rape has not been disclosed by the victim in the F.I.R. which has been lodged after inordinate delay of more than two Years, which is also one of the essential ingredients for framing charge against the applicant. No doubt in the case of allegation of rape, the statement of the prosecutrix should be given primary consideration, but at the same time, it should also be kept in mind that now-a-days there can be no presumption that in all the matters, prosecutrix would always tell the entire story truthfully. Lodging F.I.R. of rape after two years in mid night and prompt arrest of the applicant, prima facie indicate that police was already briefed and every thing was happened in a pre-planed manner, because it is not done in every case. It is well settled that every case turns on its own facts. Even one additional or different fact may make a big difference between the conclusion in two cases, because even a single significant detail may alter the entire aspect. This Court is also of the view that now-a-days, it is not safe to treat/accept the oral allegations of complainant as gospel truth without any corroborative material relevant with regard to nature of allegations. It is well settled that the conclusion of a case shall not be drawn merely from the allegation made in F.I.R. but considering all the materials and other attending circumstances. There are several disputed facts, Which are required to be proved by the prosecution and accused before the trial Court after leading evidence in accordance with law, hence there is no need to discuss much more.
8-Under the facts and circumstances, possibility of false implication of the applicant making allegation of rape against him after two years can-not be ruled out particularly in the situation when there is financial dispute of trust and complainant, her husband as well as her other associates are also office bearers of the trust established by the applicant in the year 2017, in which he is a president.
9-As a fall out and consequence of aforesaid discussion, considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
10-Let the applicant-Chandra Bhooshan Singh @ Prabhuji be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.
(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 after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.
(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned.
11-In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
12-It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
Order Date:14.02.2025 Saurabh