SUNIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As per the communication sent by the C.J.M., Lakhimpur Kheri of date 18/4/2023, the complainant/informant has been sufficiently served. However, he is not represented.

(2.) Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, Advocate has filed his power/vakalatnama on behalf of the victim of the instant case, the same is taken on record and he informs that the victim is present before this Court in person. Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant is also taken on record.

(3.) As the victim is present before this Court, some interaction was made with her in order to assess the real state of affairs and she informs that she and the applicant had already solemnized marriage, and a child is also born out of this wedlock and she is living in the house of her in-laws (parents of the applicant) and she is not having any objection, if the facility of bail is extended to the applicant.