Sunil Singh v. State of U.P

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7881 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶1Heard Shri Surendra Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Shiv Poojan, learned counsel for the first informant and Shri Uma Shankar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.23 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 316 of IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Auraiya, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶3It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the present dispute is a matrimonial dispute and there is no confirmation of evidence regarding the victim suffering miscarriage due to assault by the applicant. It is further submitted that the two accused persons have been given interim protection by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.08.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.18496 of 2024 (Sunil Singh and 2 others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others). It is further submitted that the first information report has been lodged after a delay of 9 days. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Surendra Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shiv Poojan Sunil Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)

¶4On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant and learned AGA for the State have opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submitted that on 07.05.2024, the applicant and his mother assaulted the victim, as a result of which, she suffered miscarriage. It is further submitted that there is a demand of Rs.20,00,000/- as dowry and the applicant and other accused persons are making constant harassment to the victim.

¶5As per first information report, the applicant and his family members used to demand dowry from the victim and harassed the victim in connection with the said dowry demand. On 07.05.2024, the applicant and his mother assaulted the victim, as a result of which, she suffered miscarriage. The medical report of the victim dated 17.05.2024, in which, the doctor has made statement that miscarriage suffered by the victim might have been due to assault on 07.05.2024 but the same is not confirmed.

¶6It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶7In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶8The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶9In the event of arrest of the applicant-Nitin involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted 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 NABAIL No. 7881 of 2025 dissuade him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

¶10In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. October 8, 2025 RKM NABAIL No. 7881 of 2025 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad