High Court

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

4. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in FIR/ Case Crime No. 297 of 2024, under Sections 376, 452, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Police Station Tadiyawa, District Hardoi.

5. As per the prosecution version, it is alleged that in the night of 01/02.06.2024, the applicant outraged the modesty of the daughter of the informant, while she was sleeping open door house, in absence of family members and when the alarm was raised by the nephew, the complainant reached to the spot whereafter the applicant ran away by threat of dire consequences.

6. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was not involved in committing offence and his name is roped in the FIR. He submits that just after the alleged incident, the statement of the victim under Section 161 was recorded, wherein she has stated that the applicant entered into the house and started outraging the modesty and once her nephew raised alarm, her father came over there and the applicant flee away from the spot but after 22 days of the alleged incident, the statement of the victim was recorded and under duress, she has stated that the rape has been committed by the applicant upon her, which creates material doubt in the story of the prosecution. He stated that the victim, as per the ossification report, the age of the victim is about 17 years and at the various stage, she has stated her age differently. He argued that the medical report is evident that there is no external mark of injury over the body of the alleged victim which reveals that there was no resistance by the victim or further no force observed by the applicant. He also argued that the opinion of the Doctor, as per the medical report is at no opinion with respect to the rape can be accorded. Adding his argument, he submits that there is no cogent evidence against the applicant that he has committed offence as alleged in the FIR and the story of rape has been added afterthought.

7. Further submission is that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation proceedings and the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. He also submits that the present applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 08.08.2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the FIR. He submits that the victim in her statement under Section 183 has also supported the version of prosecution as the rape is committed upon her. He next added that the victim is less than 18 years of age and there is serious allegation against the applicant and therefore, the chargesheet has been filed as such the applicant in not entitled for any relief.

9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the version of the FIR has drastically been changed say the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as when the FIR was lodged, the allegation of outraging the modesty of the daughter of the informant is levelled whereas the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. the version is changed and allegation of committing rape is levelled. It, prima facie, seems that for giving the strength to the prosecution story, the version is got changed. Further, this Court has also noticed that as per the ossification report, the age of the victim is 17 years. Further the medical report says that there is no external or internal injury over the body of the alleged victim and the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 08.08.2024. The chargesheet has been filed coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

10. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

11. Let the applicant- Mahtab involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He 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 (Now Section 269 BNS); (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. (Now Section 351 BNSS); and (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (Now Section 209 BNS). The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 25.7.2025 Mohd. Sharif

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

4. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in FIR/ Case Crime No. 297 of 2024, under Sections 376, 452, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Police Station Tadiyawa, District Hardoi.

5. As per the prosecution version, it is alleged that in the night of 01/02.06.2024, the applicant outraged the modesty of the daughter of the informant, while she was sleeping open door house, in absence of family members and when the alarm was raised by the nephew, the complainant reached to the spot whereafter the applicant ran away by threat of dire consequences.

6. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was not involved in committing offence and his name is roped in the FIR. He submits that just after the alleged incident, the statement of the victim under Section 161 was recorded, wherein she has stated that the applicant entered into the house and started outraging the modesty and once her nephew raised alarm, her father came over there and the applicant flee away from the spot but after 22 days of the alleged incident, the statement of the victim was recorded and under duress, she has stated that the rape has been committed by the applicant upon her, which creates material doubt in the story of the prosecution. He stated that the victim, as per the ossification report, the age of the victim is about 17 years and at the various stage, she has stated her age differently. He argued that the medical report is evident that there is no external mark of injury over the body of the alleged victim which reveals that there was no resistance by the victim or further no force observed by the applicant. He also argued that the opinion of the Doctor, as per the medical report is at no opinion with respect to the rape can be accorded. Adding his argument, he submits that there is no cogent evidence against the applicant that he has committed offence as alleged in the FIR and the story of rape has been added afterthought.

7. Further submission is that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation proceedings and the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. He also submits that the present applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 08.08.2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the FIR. He submits that the victim in her statement under Section 183 has also supported the version of prosecution as the rape is committed upon her. He next added that the victim is less than 18 years of age and there is serious allegation against the applicant and therefore, the chargesheet has been filed as such the applicant in not entitled for any relief.

9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the version of the FIR has drastically been changed say the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as when the FIR was lodged, the allegation of outraging the modesty of the daughter of the informant is levelled whereas the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. the version is changed and allegation of committing rape is levelled. It, prima facie, seems that for giving the strength to the prosecution story, the version is got changed. Further, this Court has also noticed that as per the ossification report, the age of the victim is 17 years. Further the medical report says that there is no external or internal injury over the body of the alleged victim and the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 08.08.2024. The chargesheet has been filed coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

10. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

11. Let the applicant- Mahtab involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He 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 (Now Section 269 BNS); (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. (Now Section 351 BNSS); and (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (Now Section 209 BNS). The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 25.7.2025 Mohd. Sharif