JAMSHED KHAN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPT. LKO.
NABAIL/247/2025 · 2025-03-20
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 128788 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 128788 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:16159 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 247 of 2025 Applicant :- Jamshed Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kumar Seth,Devdutt Prakhar,Rekha Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Krishna Kumar Seth, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arvind Kumar Pandey, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No. 191 of 2024, under Sections 69, 115(2), 351(2), 352 B.N.S., registered at Police Station Alambagh, District Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 11.10.2024 stating that the informant, whose year of birth is disclosed as 1994, used to work in a telemarketing company. She came into contact with the applicant. The applicant under the allurement of getting her employed and marrying her had repetitively made physical relations for four years as also by contracting a sham nikaah. When the informant went to live with the family members of the applicant, all of them threatened her. The applicant took her to a jungle on 19.09.2024 and assaulted her with intention to kill her but she returned safely. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail- application it has been contended that the applicant is innocent,
he has no criminal history and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. 5. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail to the applicant on the basis of instructions provided to him. He has produced the relevant recorded provided to him. In the statement of the victim under Section 180 BNSS she reiterated the F.I.R. version. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS she leveled certain further allegations which were not there either in the F.I.R. or in her previous statement. 6.
Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the informant is a 30 years old person who is expected to know the repercussions of her action; that the informant alleges that the applicant has raped her for four years under the allurement of getting her employed, whereas she herself stated that she was already employed in some telemarketing company; that some documents annexed with the bail application indicate that there were some monetary transactions between the parties and it appears that the informant was demanding money from the applicant coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and without making any observations which may affect the outcome of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant-Jamshed Khan before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court
concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court: (i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (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 the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court' (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. . (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)
Order Date :- 20.3.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench