Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 609 (HP)

Ankur Gupta v. State of H. P.

2019-05-21

SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2019
JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. The instant petition, stands instituted by the petitioner/bail applicant, under, Section 438 Cr.P.C, wherein he seeks grant of anticipatory bail qua him, given his apprehending his arrest, for his allegedly committing offences punishable, under Sections 376 of I.P.C, in case FIR No. 17 of 2019, of, 29.4.2019, registered with Women Police Station, Solan, District Solan, H.P. 2. The prosecutrix is a major. She succumbed, to, the sexual encounter, of, the bail-applicant, on 12.1.2019, under pretext, of, the accused promising, to, perform marriage with her. However, subsequent thereto, respectively, on 11.3.2019, and, on 23.3.2019, she also proceeded to succumb to the sexual overtures, of, the bail-applicant/ accused, also upon, the bail-applicant, purveying her, an, allurement of marriage. The prosecutrix being married, hence holds the capacity to mete consent, to the bailapplicant. However, the afore sexual encounters inter-se the bail-applicant/accused, and, the prosecutrix, are, allegedly stained, with, an, incriminatory tinge, qua theirs emanating, from pretext or allurement of marriage, made to her, by the bail-applicant. However, the afore pretext (s) or allurement (s), of marriage hence wherethrough, the prosecutrix meted consent to the bail applicant vis-a-vis the afore sexual encounter (s), is available, as an espousable incriminatory ascribable role, vis-a-vis, the bail applicant, only on one occasion, (i) and also upon hers immediately thereafter, hence proceeding to report the incident to the police, (ii) importantly upon, the applicant/accused refusing or declining to marry her. However, rather the prosecutrix, proceeding to, on, two occasions subsequent, to, the initial sexual encounter inter-se both, as, stood purportedly generated by, an, allurement of marriage meted to her by the bail-applicant, hence engating herself, in, sexual encounters with the bail applicant, (iii) obviously prima facie renders her incapacitated, to, espouse, that, she upon the afore pretext or allurement of marriage purveyed to her, hence meted consent, vis-a-vis, the sexual overtures of the bail applicant, (iv) and/or, that hence the effect thereof remaining alive, (v) successively throughout, (v) rather prima facie it is to be inferred qua the sexual encounter (s) inter-se the bail-applicant, and, the prosecutrix rather being free from any incriminatory taints, (vi) prominently, also with the FIR being lodged belatedly, since the last sexual encounter, which occurred inter-se both, on 23.3.2019, and the prosecutrix not rendering any tangible explication vis-a-vis the relevant delay, (vii) thereupon rather rendering, the, prosecution story to stand ingrained with, vice (s) of, pre-meditation and concoctions, whereupon no reliance can be meted, by this Court. 3. The Investigating Officer, is present in Court, and, reports that the bail-applicant, has, rendered the fullest cooperation to him, vis-a-vis, his conducting the investigations into the offences, borne in the FIR. 3. The Investigating Officer, is present in Court, and, reports that the bail-applicant, has, rendered the fullest cooperation to him, vis-a-vis, his conducting the investigations into the offences, borne in the FIR. Consequently, the bail application is allowed, moreso, with there being no material placed, on record, by the prosecution, that, in the event of indulgence of pre-arrest bail being granted to the petitioner/bail-applicant, there is every likelihood of (a) his tampering with the prosecution evidence, (b) influencing prosecution witnesses and (c) fleeing from justice, hence the bail application is allowed, and, the order rendered by this Court on 3.5.2019, is, made absolute, subject to compliance by him with the following conditions:- (i) That he shall join the investigation, as and when required by the Investigating agency; (ii) That he 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 the police; (iii) That he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; (iv) That he shall deposit his passport, if any, with the Police Station, concerned; (v) That in case of violation of any of the conditions, the bail granted to the petitioners shall be forfeited and they shall be liable to be taken into custody; (vi) That he shall apply for bail afresh when the challan is filed before the trial Court. (vii) That upon his re-indulging in criminal activities, it shall be open to the respondent, to move this Court for cancellation of bail. 4. Any observation made herein above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made herein above.