Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:13673 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1930 of 2025 Applicant :- Ghanesh Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Randhir Singh,Dharmendra Kumar Rawat,Manish Kumar Yadav,Vivek Kumar Divedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Randheer Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Srin Ashok Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 22.2.2025 in Case Crime No. 250 of 2024 u/s 376(2)n, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali City, District Pratapgarh. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. 3. At the very outset learned AGA has raised objection to the effect that the present applicant was taken in to judicial custody pursuant to the Non-Bailable Warrant issued against him since he avoided the proceedings before the learned trial court which passed order dated 10.11.2024 summoning the applicant on the protest application filed by the prosecutrix, therefore, the present applicant may either challenge the order dated 10.11.2024 before the competent court or should file his bail application before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh. On that learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards some annexures which have been filed with this bail application and some annexures filed with supplementary affidavit showing that the Advocates at Pratapgarh have given call to boycott the judicial work, so no Advocate can appear before the court to file bail application. He has also submitted that even the present applicant has filed anticipatory bail application before the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh on 23.12.2024 but on account of boycott of the judicial work by the Bar at Pratapgarh such application is still pending there, however, has been rendered infructuous because during the pendency of that anticipatory bail application the present applicant has been arrested. 4. Learned counsel has also informed that the prosecutrix is the legally wedded wife of the applicant with whom the applicant has not only got married but has got his marriage registered before the marriage registering authority on 1.6.2024 as the marriage certificate has been enclosed as Annexure no. 10 and some coloured photographs of the marriage has also been filed as Annexure no. 11. When the prosecutrix refused to live with the applicant after getting married, he filed an application u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow on 5.8.2024 for restitution of conjugal rights and that application is still pending. 5. Learned counsel has stated that before getting married with the prosecutrix the cousin of the present applicant had filed a F.I.R. against her on 22.1.2024 bearing Case Crime No. 0020 of 2024 u/s 504,506 IPC and section 67 of the Information Technology Act on the allegation that the prosecutrix had defamed his wife saying that she is in relation with the present applicant. Such defamatory post have been enclosed as Annexure no. 7. Further, the prosecutrix filed an application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. bearing Application u/s 482 No. 6406 of 2024 (Princika Srivastava vs. State and another) and during the pendency of that application the parties entered into compromise, therefore, the application / petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix has been allowed by the Court vide order dated 25.7.2024 (Annexure no. 8). After entering into the compromise and getting the favourable order from this Court on 25.7.2024 on the basis of compromise, the prosecutrix started creating undue pressure upon the applicant to purchase some property in her name and when the applicant had shown his incapability to do so, she started living with her mother at Pratapgarh. 6. Learned counsel has also submitted that the present applicant has no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and if he is released on bail he shall cooperate in the proceedings pending before the court concerned and shall not misuse the liberty of the bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. 8. Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that prosecutrix is the legally wedded wife of the applicant with whom the applicant has not only got married but has got his marriage registered before the marriage registering authority, when the prosecutrix refused to live with the applicant after getting married, he filed an application u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow on 5.8.2024 for restitution of conjugal rights and that application is still pending, before getting married with the prosecutrix the cousin of the present applicant had filed a F.I.R. against the prosecutrix on the allegation that the prosecutrix had defamed his wife saying that she is in relation with the present applicant, the prosecutrix filed an application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. bearing Application u/s 482 No. 6406 of 2024 (Princika Srivastava vs. State and another) and during the pendency of that application the parties entered into compromise, therefore, the application / petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix has been allowed by the Court vide order dated 25.7.2024, after entering into the compromise and getting the favourable order from this Court on 25.7.2024 on the basis of compromise, the prosecutrix started creating undue pressure upon the applicant to purchase some property in her name and when the applicant had shown his incapability to do so, she started living with her mother at Pratapgarh, the present applicant has no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 9. Bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant Ghanesh Shukla, involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- 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) 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.may be issued and if 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. (v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned. . (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Om Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench