Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 45043 (ALL)

SHAHRUKH v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

NABAIL/3279/2025 · 2025-05-08

Vivek Varma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:75692 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3279 of 2025 Applicant :- Shahrukh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- S.K. Verma,Vikas Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Learned A.G.A. submits that the notice of the present application has been served upon the opposite party no.2/informant on 21.4.2025 and opposite party no.4/Child Welfare Committee on 23.4.2025. The receiving endorsements produced by learned A.G.A. are taken on record. However, no one appears on behalf of the said opposite parties nor any counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf. 2. Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State and perused the material available on record. 3. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.554 of 2022, under Sections 354, 354 घ, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station- Atrauli, District- Aligarh, during the trial. 4. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. In the first information report and in the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C., there are no allegations of indecent behaviour against the applicant. Subsequently, in the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. an exaggerated version has been narrated to aggravate the offence and save the failing prosecution case. There are inconsistencies in the statements of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. The said inconsistencies discredit the prosecution case. During the course of investigation, the applicant was granted benefit of Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. Investigation has been completed. Charge sheet has been submitted. The applicant had co-operated in the investigation. The applicant has been summoned by the concerned court. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant, and the fact that there are inconsistencies in the statements of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., during the course of investigation the applicant was granted benefit of Section 41-A of Cr.P.C., investigation has been completed, charge sheet has been filed, the applicant had co-operated in the investigation, the applicant has been summoned by the concerned court, no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicant Shahrukh, involved in aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall make himself available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court. 8. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 9. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 Manish Kr Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad