High Court

Air. Upon coming to know about the FIR, she came back. She categorically stated that no misdeed has been committed against her. She had herself pressurized the applicant to take her with him but he was not agreeing. Then she threatened the applicant that she will commit suicide. She reiterated that the applicant was not at fault. She further stated that she was major, she would not go back to her home and if she commits something against herself, her family members will be responsible for it.

5. The medico-legal examination of the victim was conducted on 02.10.2024. Before the Doctor, she stated that she knows the applicant for the past two and a half years but she has not made any physical relations with him. She had gone with the applicant first to Bangalore, then Delhi and then Mumbai. As the victim had stated that no physical relations had been made by her, she did not gave answers to questions regarding details of sexual violence put by the Doctor. The medico-legal examination report mentions no external injury. However, the hymen was reported to be ruptured.

6. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., she stated that she knows the applicant for the past two and a half years, both of them loved each other and she intended to marry him upon attaining the majority. However, the applicant's mother had threatened to get the victim, her brother and mother got eliminated and she got frightened and went with the applicant to Lucknow from where she went to Bangalore through night flight. She stayed at Bangalore for 3-4 days at a house at Bangalore. Both of them were in love. Then they went from Bangalore to Mumbai and stayed there in a Hotel. The victim stated that the applicant made physical relation with her at Mumbai. Upon coming to know about the FIR, they came back. In this statement the victim stated that she wants to study and wants to live with her parents.

7. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 22 years, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is languishing in jail since 18.10.2024.

8. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith the material collected during investigation and a copy of charge- sheet submitted on 09.10.2024.

9. Nothing has been stated in the counter affidavit filed by the State regarding criminal history of the applicant. However, the applicant's involvement in another criminal case was pointed out by the learned counsel for the informant.

10. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant stating that he has been granted bail in Case Crime No.126 of 2024 under Sections 294 IPC registered at Police Station Jalalpur, District- Ambedkar Nagar by means of an order dated 21.03.2024 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar.

11. The learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application and he has submitted that the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was given by the victim under influence of the police and, therefore, it should not be given precedence over her subsequent statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. wherein the victim has alleged that the applicant had made physical relations forcibly. He has further submitted that even though the victim stated that he had gone with the applicant out of her own free will, as the victim is minor, her consent has no meaning in the eyes of law.

12. The learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the statements of the victim recorded by the Magistrate mentions her age to be 15 years. However, it is in this statement itself that the victim has stated that she is major.

13. The learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application and he has submitted that allegations have been established during investigation and a charge-sheet has been submitted on09.10.2024.

14. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, what prima facie appears from the material available before the court at this stage is that admittedly, the accused persons live in a house adjacent to the informant's house. The victim has stated in both of her statements that she knows the applicant for the past two and a half years and she loves the applicant. As per the educational documents, the date of birth of the victim is 07.07.2009. However, the victim has stated before the Magistrate that she is major. The medico-legal examination of the victim has not been conducted to ascertain her age. Even before the Magistrate, the victim stated that she knows the applicant for the past two and a half years, she loves him, she had gone with him by Car to Lucknow and then by flight to Bangalore where she stayed with him in a house, thereafter, both of them have gone Mumbai where she stayed with him in a Hotel. After this, she stated that the applicant had forcibly made physical relations with her whereas this allegation could not be substantiated during medico-legal examination of the victim as she had categorically stated that she had not made physical relations with any person. Although the learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently urged that earlier statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. was given under pressure, he has not submitted that the statement before the Doctor was also given under pressure. The subsequent change in the stand of the victim can also be an outcome of the pressure put upon the victim.

15. Without making any observation which may affect the outcome of the trial, I am of the view that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., her statement recorded by the Doctor who conducted her medico-legal examination as well as her statement recorded before the Magistrate wherein she stated that she knows the applicant for the past two and a half years, she loves him and even while staying with him, both of them were in love, coupled with the fact that the applicant is a young man aged 22 years, he is languishing in jail since 18.10.2024 whereas the investigation already stands concluded, is sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid case.

16. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

17. Let the applicant- Mohd. Hadi be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, unless his/her appearance exempted by the trial Court. . Order Date :- 9.5.2025 -Amit K- [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

Air. Upon coming to know about the FIR, she came back. She categorically stated that no misdeed has been committed against her. She had herself pressurized the applicant to take her with him but he was not agreeing. Then she threatened the applicant that she will commit suicide. She reiterated that the applicant was not at fault. She further stated that she was major, she would not go back to her home and if she commits something against herself, her family members will be responsible for it.

5. The medico-legal examination of the victim was conducted on 02.10.2024. Before the Doctor, she stated that she knows the applicant for the past two and a half years but she has not made any physical relations with him. She had gone with the applicant first to Bangalore, then Delhi and then Mumbai. As the victim had stated that no physical relations had been made by her, she did not gave answers to questions regarding details of sexual violence put by the Doctor. The medico-legal examination report mentions no external injury. However, the hymen was reported to be ruptured.

6. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., she stated that she knows the applicant for the past two and a half years, both of them loved each other and she intended to marry him upon attaining the majority. However, the applicant's mother had threatened to get the victim, her brother and mother got eliminated and she got frightened and went with the applicant to Lucknow from where she went to Bangalore through night flight. She stayed at Bangalore for 3-4 days at a house at Bangalore. Both of them were in love. Then they went from Bangalore to Mumbai and stayed there in a Hotel. The victim stated that the applicant made physical relation with her at Mumbai. Upon coming to know about the FIR, they came back. In this statement the victim stated that she wants to study and wants to live with her parents.

7. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 22 years, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is languishing in jail since 18.10.2024.

8. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith the material collected during investigation and a copy of charge- sheet submitted on 09.10.2024.

9. Nothing has been stated in the counter affidavit filed by the State regarding criminal history of the applicant. However, the applicant's involvement in another criminal case was pointed out by the learned counsel for the informant.

10. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant stating that he has been granted bail in Case Crime No.126 of 2024 under Sections 294 IPC registered at Police Station Jalalpur, District- Ambedkar Nagar by means of an order dated 21.03.2024 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar.

11. The learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application and he has submitted that the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was given by the victim under influence of the police and, therefore, it should not be given precedence over her subsequent statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. wherein the victim has alleged that the applicant had made physical relations forcibly. He has further submitted that even though the victim stated that he had gone with the applicant out of her own free will, as the victim is minor, her consent has no meaning in the eyes of law.

12. The learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the statements of the victim recorded by the Magistrate mentions her age to be 15 years. However, it is in this statement itself that the victim has stated that she is major.

13. The learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application and he has submitted that allegations have been established during investigation and a charge-sheet has been submitted on09.10.2024.

14. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, what prima facie appears from the material available before the court at this stage is that admittedly, the accused persons live in a house adjacent to the informant's house. The victim has stated in both of her statements that she knows the applicant for the past two and a half years and she loves the applicant. As per the educational documents, the date of birth of the victim is 07.07.2009. However, the victim has stated before the Magistrate that she is major. The medico-legal examination of the victim has not been conducted to ascertain her age. Even before the Magistrate, the victim stated that she knows the applicant for the past two and a half years, she loves him, she had gone with him by Car to Lucknow and then by flight to Bangalore where she stayed with him in a house, thereafter, both of them have gone Mumbai where she stayed with him in a Hotel. After this, she stated that the applicant had forcibly made physical relations with her whereas this allegation could not be substantiated during medico-legal examination of the victim as she had categorically stated that she had not made physical relations with any person. Although the learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently urged that earlier statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. was given under pressure, he has not submitted that the statement before the Doctor was also given under pressure. The subsequent change in the stand of the victim can also be an outcome of the pressure put upon the victim.

15. Without making any observation which may affect the outcome of the trial, I am of the view that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., her statement recorded by the Doctor who conducted her medico-legal examination as well as her statement recorded before the Magistrate wherein she stated that she knows the applicant for the past two and a half years, she loves him and even while staying with him, both of them were in love, coupled with the fact that the applicant is a young man aged 22 years, he is languishing in jail since 18.10.2024 whereas the investigation already stands concluded, is sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid case.

16. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

17. Let the applicant- Mohd. Hadi be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, unless his/her appearance exempted by the trial Court. . Order Date :- 9.5.2025 -Amit K- [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]