Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 169592 (ALL)

RAJESH KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO.

BAIL/12758/2024 · 2025-03-19

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:15965 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12758 of 2024 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Satendra Nath Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mahesh Kumar Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Rejoinder affidavit filed by the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Satendra Nath Rai, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajiv Kumar Verma, learned AGA for the State, Shri Mahesh Kumar, the learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.196 of 2024 under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Khodare, District- Gonda. 4. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of F.I.R. lodged on 19.09.2024 against five persons, including the applicant, his mother, two brothers and sister, stating that the informant was in a loving relationship with the applicant for the past six years, he took her to his home about eight months ago under allurement of marrying her, kept her at his home as his wife and the informant believed the applicant and lived with him as his wife but on 18.01.2024, all the accused persons beaten her. She had given an application in the police station on 19.01.2024 whereupon the applicant was kept into custody for 24 hours. Thereafter, the parties had entered into a compromise on 20.01.2024 wherein the applicant had agreed to marry the complainant but he did not do so. She has written in the F.I.R. that the applicant should be produced before her either alive or dead. 5. In the statement of the informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she stated that the applicant is related to her. 6. The medico-legal examination report of the informant does not make a mention of any mark of injury or sign of use of force. 7. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 8. The State has filed two counter affidavits and the informant has also filed a counter affidavit. The material annexed with the counter affidavit has already been annexed with the bail application. 9. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the informant is in a relationship with the applicant for the past six years and she was living with him as his wife for the past eight months; that the applicant was turned out of the applicant's home on 18.01.2024 and the FIR has been lodged on 19.09.2024, prima facie it appears that the informant and the applicant were in a consensual relationship and the FIR has been lodged after their relation turned sour, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime. 10. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Rajesh Kumar be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. . [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.] Order Date :- 19.3.2025 -Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench