Lakhan Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

learned counsel for the complainant as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR No.0198 of 2024 under Sections 406, 376, 504, 506 Indian Penal Code, Police Station Para, District Lucknow. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that about five years ago, the informant had paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the accused applicant Lakhan Singh for the purchase of a plot. The applicant represented himself as the Secretary of Naveen Cooperative Housing Society and assured the informant that he owned several plots and would transfer one to her. However, even after the lapse of five years, neither any plot was allotted to the informant nor the money returned by the accused. On 31.03.2024 at about 8:00 p.m., the applicant called the informant near the flyover in front of Purana Para Police Station, stating that he would return her money. The informant, relying on this assurance, reached the spot where the accused was waiting on his white scooter. The accused made the informant sit on his scooter and took her towards the forest near Tikunia turn at the canal bank, assuring her that the money would be handed over there. On reaching the secluded place, two 2 BAIL No. 7791 of 2024 other unknown persons were already present. It is further alleged that the applicant forcibly committed rape upon the informant, while the two unknown accomplices, on the instructions of applicant, filmed the incident. He further threatened her by saying that he would upload the obscene video on YouTube. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is a major, aged about 43 years and married. It is contended that the victim has concocted the present story only to exploit the applicant for money. The alleged white scooty, as stated by the victim in her statement, was on the relevant date given for service, and the receipt of service is already on record along with the bail application. The victim has made varied and inconsistent statements at different stages of investigation. In her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she narrated a different version, whereas in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she improved upon the allegations and even added that she was beaten apart from being subjected to rape. However, despite such allegations, no video as alleged by the victim has been recovered by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation. Further, the medico-legal examination of the victim does not support her version. No external or internal injuries corroborating the allegations under Section 164 Cr.P.C. have been found. There were no signs of physical injury on the entire body of the victim. The prosecution case suffers from serious contradictions and lack of corroboration, and the applicant has been falsely roped in. The charge sheet has already been filed in the matter. The applicant has also explained his criminal history in the bail application as well as in the rejoinder affidavit. It is further submitted that the applicant is presently 70 years old, and considering his age, coupled with the inconsistencies in the prosecution case, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. It is lastly submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. It is submitted that the applicant 3 BAIL No. 7791 of 2024 has criminal history of 13 cases and looking to the gravity of the offence no indulgence is warranted by this Court and the bail application is liable to be rejected. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration to the material available on record; statements of the victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as also the facts that the applicant is in jail since 6.4.2024; charge sheet in the matter has been filed; age of the applicant about 70 years; the applicant has duly explained his criminal history; the Investigating Officer has neither recovered the alleged scooty nor the alleged video during the course of investigation; the medico-legal examination of the victim also does not corroborate the prosecution version and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Lakhan Singh be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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 dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present 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. 4 BAIL No. 7791 of 2024 (v) The applicant 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 of the IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS)is issued and the 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 of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS). September 24, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

learned counsel for the complainant as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR No.0198 of 2024 under Sections 406, 376, 504, 506 Indian Penal Code, Police Station Para, District Lucknow. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that about five years ago, the informant had paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the accused applicant Lakhan Singh for the purchase of a plot. The applicant represented himself as the Secretary of Naveen Cooperative Housing Society and assured the informant that he owned several plots and would transfer one to her. However, even after the lapse of five years, neither any plot was allotted to the informant nor the money returned by the accused. On 31.03.2024 at about 8:00 p.m., the applicant called the informant near the flyover in front of Purana Para Police Station, stating that he would return her money. The informant, relying on this assurance, reached the spot where the accused was waiting on his white scooter. The accused made the informant sit on his scooter and took her towards the forest near Tikunia turn at the canal bank, assuring her that the money would be handed over there. On reaching the secluded place, two 2 BAIL No. 7791 of 2024 other unknown persons were already present. It is further alleged that the applicant forcibly committed rape upon the informant, while the two unknown accomplices, on the instructions of applicant, filmed the incident. He further threatened her by saying that he would upload the obscene video on YouTube. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is a major, aged about 43 years and married. It is contended that the victim has concocted the present story only to exploit the applicant for money. The alleged white scooty, as stated by the victim in her statement, was on the relevant date given for service, and the receipt of service is already on record along with the bail application. The victim has made varied and inconsistent statements at different stages of investigation. In her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she narrated a different version, whereas in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she improved upon the allegations and even added that she was beaten apart from being subjected to rape. However, despite such allegations, no video as alleged by the victim has been recovered by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation. Further, the medico-legal examination of the victim does not support her version. No external or internal injuries corroborating the allegations under Section 164 Cr.P.C. have been found. There were no signs of physical injury on the entire body of the victim. The prosecution case suffers from serious contradictions and lack of corroboration, and the applicant has been falsely roped in. The charge sheet has already been filed in the matter. The applicant has also explained his criminal history in the bail application as well as in the rejoinder affidavit. It is further submitted that the applicant is presently 70 years old, and considering his age, coupled with the inconsistencies in the prosecution case, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. It is lastly submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. It is submitted that the applicant 3 BAIL No. 7791 of 2024 has criminal history of 13 cases and looking to the gravity of the offence no indulgence is warranted by this Court and the bail application is liable to be rejected. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration to the material available on record; statements of the victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as also the facts that the applicant is in jail since 6.4.2024; charge sheet in the matter has been filed; age of the applicant about 70 years; the applicant has duly explained his criminal history; the Investigating Officer has neither recovered the alleged scooty nor the alleged video during the course of investigation; the medico-legal examination of the victim also does not corroborate the prosecution version and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Lakhan Singh be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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 dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present 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. 4 BAIL No. 7791 of 2024 (v) The applicant 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 of the IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS)is issued and the 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 of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS). September 24, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)