Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.
Sunil Kumar - Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 286 of 2024
Decided On : 22-05-2024
BAIL - ANTICIPATORY BAIL - The court condoned the delay in filing the counter affidavit and granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, Sunil Kumar, accused of sexual exploitation under IPC Sections 376, 504, and 506. The court considered the long-term relationship between the applicant and the informant, the informant's current pregnancy, and the applicant's threats post-employment. The decision emphasized the need for cooperation with the investigation and imposed conditions to prevent witness tampering and ensure the applicant's presence in court.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, Sunil Kumar, is accused of sexually exploiting the informant for ten years and threatening her after securing a government job. The informant is currently six months pregnant and claims the applicant refuses to marry her.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant should be granted anticipatory bail, considering the nature of the relationship and the circumstances surrounding the case.
Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail given the serious allegations of sexual exploitation and threats against the informant.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the long-term relationship and the informant's pregnancy were significant factors in favor of granting bail, alongside the applicant's willingness to cooperate with the investigation.
Result: The anticipatory bail application was allowed, subject to conditions including cooperation with the investigation and restrictions on leaving the country.
JUDGMENT :
(Ravindra Maithani, J.) :
Delay in filing counter affidavit is condoned. Counter affidavit is taken on record. Delay Condonation Application IA No.2 of 2024 stands disposed of, accordingly.
2. Applicant Sunil Kumar seeks anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.123 of 2024, under Sections 376, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Kunda, District Udham Singh Nagar.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. According to the FIR, the applicant has been sexually exploiting the informant for the last 10 years from the date of filing of the FIR. He also got once the foetus of the informant aborted. The FIR records that after the applicant was appointed in the Government Job,, he started threatening the informant.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the victim is major; it is a case of relationship. Therefore, it is a case fit for bail.
6. Learned counsel for the informant would submit that the informant is 6 months’ pregnant; the applicant is declining to marry; under the misconception of facts, the applicant established physical relations with the victim.
7. Learned State Counsel adopts the arguments, as advanced by learned counsel for the informant.
8. Having considered, this Court is of the view that this is a case, in which the applicant should be granted anticipatory bail. The instant anticipatory bail application deserves to be allowed.
9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
10. In the eventuality of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (“AO”). In addition to it, the applicant shall also comply with the following conditions:-
(ii) The applicant shall not approach any witness in any manner, whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the court concerned.
(iv) The applicant shall deposit his passports with the AO. The passport may only be returned by the order of the court concerned. In case the applicant does not have passport, he shall give an undertaking to that effect to the AO.
(v) The applicant shall also give an undertaking on (i), (ii) & (iii) above.
Anticipatory bail can be granted in cases of serious allegations if the court finds that the circumstances, including the nature of the relationship and the potential for cooperation with the investi....
The court established that the issuance of non-bailable warrants and proceedings under Section 82 of the Code negate the entitlement to anticipatory bail.
The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants, emphasizing the need for cooperation with the investigation and restrictions on witness contact.
Anticipatory bail can be granted despite serious allegations if investigation is complete and there is no indication of misuse of prior protection granted by the court.
The main legal point established is that in granting anticipatory bail, the court considered the specific allegations against the applicant and the involvement of the informant in illegal activities.
The court may grant anticipatory bail based on the lack of previous criminal history and the circumstances of the case, including the conduct of other involved parties.
Grant of anticipatory bail based on the factual matrix, conduct of the parties, and lack of threat perception from the prosecutrix.
applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground that applicant was not only declared proclaimed offender under Section 82 Cr.P.C. but proclamation of attachment of property was also iss....
Anticipatory bail may be granted in cases involving allegations of physical relations under a promise of marriage when the parties are consenting adults, provided the court finds it appropriate to en....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
