Allahabad High Court

: Vivek Srivastava : G.A., Rahul Kumar Shukla, Shivam Srivastava, Tanmay Pradeep Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

2. The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in F.I.R. No.263 of 2023, under Sections 376, 313, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, P.S. Safipur, District Unnao.

3. This Court while granting interim protection vide order dated

08.02.2024 has passed the following order:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 05.01.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No.4093 of 2023 arising out of F.I.R. No.263 of 2023, under Sections 376, 313, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, P.S. Safipur, District Unnao.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that as per the prosecution case, date of birth of the victim of the present case is 16.07.1993 and presently she is aged about 30 years and she was in relationship with the appellant whose date of birth is 10.07.1998. As the victim was in relationship with the appellant since last seven years and at the time of alleged incident, victim was 2 CRLA No. 387 of 2024 minor, therefore, victim herself committed wrong with the appellant but only with the intention to blackmail the appellant and his family members, F.I.R. of case in question was lodged. He further submits that there is no evidence against the appellant related to the offence under Section 313 IPC. He further submits that during the course of investigation, statements of independent witnesses, namely, Ram Kishor, etc. were recorded and they categorically stated that some time ago, the victim came to the house of the appellant and started crying in front of his parents and told them that she loved their son (appellant) and would solemnize married with him, on which, parents of appellant scolded her.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the charge sheet has already been filed and there is no possibility of tampering of any evidence and the appellant is in jail since 08.11.2023. He lastly submits that the court below failed to appreciate all these facts, therefore, the appellant is entitled to get interim bail till the disposal of the present appeal.

5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits that the victim has supported the prosecution story but does not dispute this fact that at the time of alleged incident which was taken place seven years ago, the appellant was aged about 18 years whereas the victim was aged about 23 years.

6. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of F.I.R., statement of victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., statement of independent witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as other relevant documents, it is evident from that at the time of alleged incident, appellant was aged about 18 years and victim was aged about 23 years, as in the F.I.R., victim admitted that she was in relationship with the appellant since last seven years, as there is no evidence related to the offence under Section 313 I.P.C. but all these facts were not considered by the trial court, therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled for interim bail.

7. Let appellant -Akash Pandey be released on interim bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount subject to following conditions:- (i) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) The appellant 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 any police office or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present 3 CRLA No. 387 of 2024 in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (v) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC. (vi) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

8. Any violation of above conditions will be treated as misuse of bail.

9. Issue notice to respondent no. 2/complainant returnable at an early date.

10. List this case on 15.04.2024.

11. On the next date, the matter shall be decided finally.”

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in compliance of order extracted above, the applicant has filed bonds and he has been enlarged on anticipatory bail.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed. The applicant has co-operated in the investigation and further undertake to cooperate in the trial.

6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation. He further submits that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed.

7. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record, the fact that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, applicant has no previous criminal history, he has cooperated in the investigation, 4 CRLA No. 387 of 2024 undertaking that he shall cooperate in the trial, as also considering the dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC online SC 98 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the interim protection granted earlier vide order dated 08.02.2024 is liable to be and is hereby made absolute.

8. The application is allowed accordingly. November 25, 2025 Arti/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.)

: Vivek Srivastava : G.A., Rahul Kumar Shukla, Shivam Srivastava, Tanmay Pradeep Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

2. The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in F.I.R. No.263 of 2023, under Sections 376, 313, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, P.S. Safipur, District Unnao.

3. This Court while granting interim protection vide order dated

08.02.2024 has passed the following order:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 05.01.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No.4093 of 2023 arising out of F.I.R. No.263 of 2023, under Sections 376, 313, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, P.S. Safipur, District Unnao.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that as per the prosecution case, date of birth of the victim of the present case is 16.07.1993 and presently she is aged about 30 years and she was in relationship with the appellant whose date of birth is 10.07.1998. As the victim was in relationship with the appellant since last seven years and at the time of alleged incident, victim was 2 CRLA No. 387 of 2024 minor, therefore, victim herself committed wrong with the appellant but only with the intention to blackmail the appellant and his family members, F.I.R. of case in question was lodged. He further submits that there is no evidence against the appellant related to the offence under Section 313 IPC. He further submits that during the course of investigation, statements of independent witnesses, namely, Ram Kishor, etc. were recorded and they categorically stated that some time ago, the victim came to the house of the appellant and started crying in front of his parents and told them that she loved their son (appellant) and would solemnize married with him, on which, parents of appellant scolded her.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the charge sheet has already been filed and there is no possibility of tampering of any evidence and the appellant is in jail since 08.11.2023. He lastly submits that the court below failed to appreciate all these facts, therefore, the appellant is entitled to get interim bail till the disposal of the present appeal.

5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits that the victim has supported the prosecution story but does not dispute this fact that at the time of alleged incident which was taken place seven years ago, the appellant was aged about 18 years whereas the victim was aged about 23 years.

6. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of F.I.R., statement of victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., statement of independent witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as other relevant documents, it is evident from that at the time of alleged incident, appellant was aged about 18 years and victim was aged about 23 years, as in the F.I.R., victim admitted that she was in relationship with the appellant since last seven years, as there is no evidence related to the offence under Section 313 I.P.C. but all these facts were not considered by the trial court, therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled for interim bail.

7. Let appellant -Akash Pandey be released on interim bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount subject to following conditions:- (i) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) The appellant 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 any police office or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present 3 CRLA No. 387 of 2024 in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (v) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC. (vi) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

8. Any violation of above conditions will be treated as misuse of bail.

9. Issue notice to respondent no. 2/complainant returnable at an early date.

10. List this case on 15.04.2024.

11. On the next date, the matter shall be decided finally.”

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in compliance of order extracted above, the applicant has filed bonds and he has been enlarged on anticipatory bail.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed. The applicant has co-operated in the investigation and further undertake to cooperate in the trial.

6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation. He further submits that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed.

7. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record, the fact that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, applicant has no previous criminal history, he has cooperated in the investigation, 4 CRLA No. 387 of 2024 undertaking that he shall cooperate in the trial, as also considering the dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC online SC 98 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the interim protection granted earlier vide order dated 08.02.2024 is liable to be and is hereby made absolute.

8. The application is allowed accordingly. November 25, 2025 Arti/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.)