High Court · 2025

2. Heard Sri Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Arjun, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 235 of 2024, under Sections 70(2), 115(2), 351(2), 123 BNS and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Chhaprauli, District Baghpat.

4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 15.09.2024 by Satendra against the applicant and co-accused Mohit alleging therein that his daughter aged about 14 years was studying in class 8th. On 13.09.2024 at about 10:00 pm his daughter went missing who was searched but could not be traced. Then in the morning of 14.09.2024 at about 05:00 am she is in an intoxicated condition/semiconscious state returned home who was after sometime enquired who told that on 13.09.2024 at about 10:00 pm the accused persons came wherein Mohit got the door opened and then they made her to smell something in handkerchief and took her with them. Co-accused Mohit took her in the sugarcane field and committed rape upon her. She was assaulted and threatened. FIR be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the victim in her statement under Section 180 BNSS reiterated the prosecution version as per the FIR but further to a question asked by the Investigating Officer as to whether Arjun also committed rape upon her, she denied. It is further submitted that in her statement under Section 183 BNSS she improved the version and states of both the accused persons disrobing her and then fondling her and enraging her modesty after which Mohit committed rape upon her. It is submitted that the same is an improvement in the prosecution version and exaggeration. It is submitted that initially the prosecution case was of co-accused Mohit only committing rape upon her which has also come in the statement of the victim under Section 180 BNSS but later on improvements with regards to role of the applicant has been stated by her which is an afterthought and to give the case a different colour. It is further submitted that the FIR has been lodged after unexplained delay of two days since the victim went missing on 13.09.2024 but the FIR has been lodged on 15.09.2024. It is further submitted that the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused Mohit. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 22 of the affidavit and is in jail since 28.09.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that the victim is a minor girl. It is submitted that the applicant is named in the FIR and also in the statement of the victim under Section 183 BNSS, the applicant has been assigned role of fondling and enraging her modesty along with co-accused Mohit after which co-accused Mohit is stated to have committed rape. Learned counsel for the first informant further submits that the medical examination of the applicant also goes to show that there was some discharge present. It is submitted that the bail of the applicant be rejected.

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the victim went missing for which the FIR has been lodged after her reaching home and telling the story wherein co-accused Mohit committed rape upon her. She states the same fact in her statement under Section 180 BNSS. Subsequently, in her statement under Section 183 BNSS she states of the applicant Arjun and co-accused Mohit enraging her modesty and then co-accused Mohit committing rape upon her. The FIR has been lodged after two days.

8. The case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co- accused Mohit.

9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Let the applicant Arjun, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (one of the sureties of the applicant will be his family member and the other to be of local person) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant 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 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 applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 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 209 BNS, 2023. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Arjun, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 235 of 2024, under Sections 70(2), 115(2), 351(2), 123 BNS and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Chhaprauli, District Baghpat.

4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 15.09.2024 by Satendra against the applicant and co-accused Mohit alleging therein that his daughter aged about 14 years was studying in class 8th. On 13.09.2024 at about 10:00 pm his daughter went missing who was searched but could not be traced. Then in the morning of 14.09.2024 at about 05:00 am she is in an intoxicated condition/semiconscious state returned home who was after sometime enquired who told that on 13.09.2024 at about 10:00 pm the accused persons came wherein Mohit got the door opened and then they made her to smell something in handkerchief and took her with them. Co-accused Mohit took her in the sugarcane field and committed rape upon her. She was assaulted and threatened. FIR be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the victim in her statement under Section 180 BNSS reiterated the prosecution version as per the FIR but further to a question asked by the Investigating Officer as to whether Arjun also committed rape upon her, she denied. It is further submitted that in her statement under Section 183 BNSS she improved the version and states of both the accused persons disrobing her and then fondling her and enraging her modesty after which Mohit committed rape upon her. It is submitted that the same is an improvement in the prosecution version and exaggeration. It is submitted that initially the prosecution case was of co-accused Mohit only committing rape upon her which has also come in the statement of the victim under Section 180 BNSS but later on improvements with regards to role of the applicant has been stated by her which is an afterthought and to give the case a different colour. It is further submitted that the FIR has been lodged after unexplained delay of two days since the victim went missing on 13.09.2024 but the FIR has been lodged on 15.09.2024. It is further submitted that the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused Mohit. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 22 of the affidavit and is in jail since 28.09.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that the victim is a minor girl. It is submitted that the applicant is named in the FIR and also in the statement of the victim under Section 183 BNSS, the applicant has been assigned role of fondling and enraging her modesty along with co-accused Mohit after which co-accused Mohit is stated to have committed rape. Learned counsel for the first informant further submits that the medical examination of the applicant also goes to show that there was some discharge present. It is submitted that the bail of the applicant be rejected.

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the victim went missing for which the FIR has been lodged after her reaching home and telling the story wherein co-accused Mohit committed rape upon her. She states the same fact in her statement under Section 180 BNSS. Subsequently, in her statement under Section 183 BNSS she states of the applicant Arjun and co-accused Mohit enraging her modesty and then co-accused Mohit committing rape upon her. The FIR has been lodged after two days.

8. The case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co- accused Mohit.

9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Let the applicant Arjun, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (one of the sureties of the applicant will be his family member and the other to be of local person) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant 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 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 applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 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 209 BNS, 2023. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad