High Court · 2025

7. It is further mentioned in the FIR that in the last week of November, 2021 at about 5 pm in the evening, applicant Alishan (applicant no. 2 in Crl Misc. Bail Application No. 11540 of 2025) came alongwith applicant Afzal (applicant no. 3 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 11540 of 2025) in the office and they also committed rape upon the victim i.e. informant and next day informant went back to her home with her husband.

8. As per the FIR considering the political influence of the applicants and other accused informant earlier could not make complaint to anyone and when she came to know that some other victims have lodged FIRs against them then she lodged FIR of the present case. Submission advanced on behalf of applicants:-

9. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that on the basis of false allegations, applicants have been made accused in the present matter after three years.

10. They further submitted that as per prosecutrix i.e. informant applicants committed rape upon her in November, 2021 but she lodged the FIR on 2.10.2024 and this fact clearly suggests that FIR is nothing but bundle of false facts.

11. They further submitted that however, informant tried to explain the delay in lodging the FIR by stating that as applicants were having political influence and therefore, she earlier could not lodge the FIR against them but on this ground, it cannot be said that she explained the delay of 3 years in lodging the FIR of the present case.

12. They further submitted that admittedly prosecutrix i.e. informant is married and major lady and story narrated by her in the FIR and in her both the statements recorded during investigation does not appear to be convincing and no prudent man can believe on such hypothetical version.

13. They further submitted that as applicants are sons of Iqbal who is Member of Parliament, therefore, due to political enmity, they have been roped in the present matter.

14. They further submitted that if applicants and other accused would have committed rape upon the informant then she would not have silently went home and she would have definitely disclosed this fact to someone.

15. They further submitted that three years silence of prosecutrix i.e. informant casts serious doubt upon the story narrated by her. 2 of 9

16. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant-Wazid (applicant No. 1 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 11540 of 2025) submitted that apart from the present case, however, applicant is having criminal history of as many as 16 cases but in all these cases he has been made accused only due to his political background.

17. He further submitted that entire criminal history of applicant-Wazid has been duly explained in paragraph Nos. 28 to 43 of the affidavit filed in support of his bail application. Details of which are as follows:- Srl. No. Case details Relates to offences Under sections Result

1. Case crime No. 318 of 447 IPC 2017

2. Case Crime No. 97 of 504, 506 IPC 2022

3. Case crime No. 177 of 2019

4. Case crime No. 1409 of 2017

5. Case crime No. 421 of 2024 420,504, 506 467, 448, 471 IPC 420, 468, 477A, 120-B 471 IPC & 629A Companies Act 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC

6. Case crime No. 196 of 420, 406, 506 IPC 2017

7. Case crime No. 286 of 307, 504, 506, 120B IPC 2022 Proceedings of the cases have been stayed. Arrest applicants been stayed. Proceedings both the cases quashed.

8. Case crime No. 313 of 2022

9. Case crime No. 181 of 2022

10. Case crime No. 178 of 2019 420, 504, 506, 386, 389, 120B IPC and 3(2)(5A) SC/ST Act 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 120B IPC 406, 342, 504, 506, 354 IPC

11. Case crime No. 245 of 406, 420 IPC 2019

12. Case crime No. 519 of 2021 420, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC

13. Case crime No. 83 of After investigation final report has been submitted. Released anticipatory bail. 2022 2/3 U.P. Gangsters Act In these cases 3 of 9

14. Case crime No. 457 of applicant is on bail. 2022

15. Case crime No. 24 of 376D, 342, 120B IPC 2023

16. Case crime No. 89 of 376, 506 IPC 2023

18. He further submitted that however, out of 16 cases two cases relate to the provisions of U.P. Gangsters Act and two cases are of rape but in all the four cases after considering entire facts of the case applicant-Wazid has been released on bail as these cases also based on false facts like present one.

19. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant-Alishan (applicant no. 2 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 11540 of 2025) submitted that apart from the present case applicant is although having criminal history of 12 other cases but his entire criminal history has also been duly explained from para-44 to 55 of the affidavit filed in support of his bail application. Details of which are as follows:- Srl. No. Case details

1. Case crime No. 246 of 2017 Offence under sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 354, 147, 148, 386, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC

2. Case crime No. 102 of 2022 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC

3. Case Crime No. 177 of 2019 420, 504, 506, 467, 468, 471 IPC Result Released Anticipatory Bail. Proceedings have been stayed. Case Crime No. 97 of 2022 504, 506 IPC Case crime no. 286 of 2022 307, 504, 506, 120 IPC Proceeding of the case has been quashed. Case crime No. 181 of 2022 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 120B IPC Final report has been submitted. Case crime No. 421 of 2024 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC Arrest of the applicant has been stayed. Case crime No. 83 of 2022 2/3 Gangsters Act

9. Case crime No. 457 of 2022 Released on bail. 4 of 9

10. Case crime No. 122 of 2022 376, 323, 354A IPC & 7/8 POCSO Act

11. Case crime No. 195 of 376 D, 506 IPC 2022

12. Case crime No.245 of 2022 376D, 342, 504, 323 IPC

20. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant-Afzal (applicant No. 3 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 11540 of 2025) submitted that however, apart from the present case applicant is also having criminal history of 8 cases but his entire criminal history has also been explained from para-56 to 63 of the affidavit. Details of which are as follows:- Srl. No.

6. Case details Relates to offences Under sections Result Case crime No. 181 of 2022 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 120B IPC Final report has been submitted. Case crime No. 421 of 2024 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC Arrest has been stayed. Case crime No. 286 of 2022 Case crime No. 83 of 2022 307, 504, 506, 120B IPC Proceeding has been quashed. 2/3 Gangsters Act Case crime No. 122 of 2022 376, 323, 354AIPC and 7/8 POCSO Act Case crime No. 195 of 2022 376D, 506 IPC Applicant released on bail

7. Case crime No. 245 of 376D, 342, 504, 323 IPC 2022

8. Case crime No. 89 of 2023 376, 506 IPC & ¾ POCSO Act

21. Learned counsel for applicants Alishan and Afzal submitted that however, both the applicants were also made accused in other cases of rape but in these cases also they have been made accused quite dramatically on the basis of false allegations and in these cases also they have been released on bail.

22. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant-Javed (applicant in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 8341 of 2025) submitted that applicant is also having criminal history of 19 other cases but his entire criminal history has also been duly explained in para Nos. 3 to 21 of the supplementary affidavit dated 10.3.2025 filed in support of his bail application. Details of which are as follows:- 5 of 9 Srl. No. Case details Relates to offences Under sections Result

9. Case crime No. 65 of 2018 403, 447, 506, 120B IPC Case crime No. 39 of 2018 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC Case crime No. 177 of 2019 420, 504, 506, 467, 468, 471 IPC Case crime No. 97 of 2022 504, 506, 386 IPC Case crime No. 421 of 2024 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC Case crime No. 246 of 2017 Case crime No. 226 of 2020 Case crime No. 1409 of 2017 452, 323, 504, 506, 354, 147, 148,386, 420, 467, 468 & 120B IPC 174A IPC 420, 468, 477 A, 471 IPC & 629 A Companies Act Case crime No. 519 of 2021 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC

10. Case crime No. 83 of 2/3 Gangsters Act 2022 Proceedings have been stayed. Applicant released on anticipatory bail by the court below. Applicant released on bail by the court below Proceeding has been stayed by this Court. Applicant has been released on Anticipatory bail by the Apex Court Applicant has been released on bail by the Apex Court.

11. Case crime No. 127 of 2022 420, 467, 468, 471, 342, 386, 504, 506 IPC Appeal has been allowed by the Apex Court.

12. Case crime No. 122 of 2022 376,323, 354Ka IPC & 7/8 POCSO Act Applicant is on bail by the court below.

13. Case crime No. 195 of 376D IPC 2022

14. Case crime No. 181 of 2022 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 120B IPC Final report has been submitted.

15. Case crime No. 457 of 2/3 Gangsters Act 2022

16. Case crime No. 245 of 2022 376D, 342, 504, 323 IPC Applicant has been released on bail by this 6 of 9

17. Case crime No. 24 of 376D, 342, 120B IPC Court. 2023

18. Case crime No. 286 of 2022

19. Case crime No. 625 of 2022 307, 504, 506, 120B IPC 307, 504, 506, 120B IPC Entire proceeding of the summoning order has been quashed.

23. He further submitted that however, applicant-Javed also made accused in four other cases of rape but in these cases he is on bail and these cases were also lodged on false allegations like present case.

24. Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that after perusing entire criminal antecedents of the applicants it is apparent that they have been falsely made accused in all the cases like present one and on the basis of such criminal antecedents of the applicants, it is not proper to withheld their bail applications considering their political background and Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

25. They further submitted that applicants are in jail since 5.10.2024 i.e. for last ten months. Submission made on behalf of the State-

26. Per contra, learned AAG appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicants are very influential persons, therefore, earlier prosecutrix could not make complaint against them but when she came to know that some other victims like her lodged FIR against them then she gathered some courage and thereafter she lodged FIR of the present case and considering the political influence of the applicants, it cannot be said that there is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR of the present case.

27. He further submitted that even merely on the ground of delay in lodging the FIR, entire prosecution case including statements of the victim recorded during investigation cannot be disbelieved.

28. He further submitted that it is a case of gang rape and being employer of the prosecturix, applicants committed rape upon her and being their maid under their pressure and influence poor prosecutrix earlier could neither make any complaint at that time nor she could immediately lodge FIR against them.

29. He further submitted that even all the applicants are hardened criminals and they frequently misused their position and however, in some cases proceedings have been quashed and final reports have been submitted and in remaining cases they are either on anticipatory bail or on bail but considering their criminal antecedents, there is every possibility that after release on bail, they will again commit such serious offences of rape by exploiting innocent girls. He next submits, even apart from present case applicants are also having criminal history of other cases of rape. 7 of 9

30. He further submitted that after perusing their criminal antecedents, it is apparent that they misused the liberty of bail and anticipatory bail granted to them.

31. He further submitted that therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case including long criminal antecedents of the applicants they are not entitled to be released on bail. Analysis:-

32. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

33. It is a case of gang rape and as per allegations, applicants committed rape upon the prosecutrix who was their maid but it reflects as per prosecutrix, applicants committed rape upon her in the Month of November, 2021 and she lodged the FIR of the present case on 2.10.2024 i.e. after about 3 years and therefore, there is huge delay of three years in lodging the FIR of the present case.

34. Further, however, prosecutrix tried to explain the above delay by stating that applicants are highly influential persons and therefore, she immediately could not lodge the FIR against them and when she came to know that some other victims have lodged FIRs against them then she gathered courage and lodged FIR of the present case but merely on the basis of above explanation, at this stage, it cannot be said that she has explained the delay of three years in lodging the FIR of the present case.

35. Further, admittedly prosecutrix i.e. informant of the case is major and married lady and however, she was maid of the applicants but story narrated by her in the FIR as well as in her both the statements recorded during investigation, prima facie, does not appear to be convincing. No matter how serious the allegations are, the allegations cannot be accepted blindly without analysing them.

36. In view of this Court, the delay of three years in lodging the FIR of the present case and the story narrated by prosecutrix, prima facie casts serious doubt on the entire prosecution case.

37. Further, however, applicants are having huge criminal history to their credit but their entire criminal antecedents have been duly explained in their respective bail applications and in their respective supplementary affidavits.

38. Further, however, from the criminal history of applicants it reflects, they were also made accused in some rape cases but in these cases they are on bail. Considering their bail orders which have been annexed alongwith their bail applications, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants that in these cases also they have been falsely made accused like present one, cannot be completely ruled out.

39. Further, however, except the cases of rape, applicants have also been made accused in two cases of U.P. Gangsters Act but in these cases also they are on bail. The other remaining cases do not appear to be cases relate to heinous offences and 8 of 9 in number of cases either proceedings have been stayed or quashed or they are on anticipatory bail.

40. Further, while deciding the bail application of an accused the Court should consider that whether facts and circumstances of the case in which he is seeking bail as well as of the cases relate to his criminal history, prima facie, indicate towards his false implication or not.

41. In case at hand, considering political background of the applicants and manner of their implication in the present case, in view of this Court, it would be not proper to withheld their bail applications merely on the ground of their criminal antecedents.

42. Further, however, while considering bail application of an accused his criminal antecedents are having its own importance but if otherwise case of bail is made out then merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, ordinarily bail application of an accused should not be dismissed.

43. Further, applicants are in jail since October, 2024 i.e. for last more than ten months and law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and his bail application should not be dismissed for punitive purpose.

44. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

45. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail applications are allowed.

46. Let the applicants-Javed, Wajid, Alishan and Afzal be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless their personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

47. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicants.

48. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date:-12.08.2025 Ankita 9 of 9 ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

7. It is further mentioned in the FIR that in the last week of November, 2021 at about 5 pm in the evening, applicant Alishan (applicant no. 2 in Crl Misc. Bail Application No. 11540 of 2025) came alongwith applicant Afzal (applicant no. 3 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 11540 of 2025) in the office and they also committed rape upon the victim i.e. informant and next day informant went back to her home with her husband.

8. As per the FIR considering the political influence of the applicants and other accused informant earlier could not make complaint to anyone and when she came to know that some other victims have lodged FIRs against them then she lodged FIR of the present case. Submission advanced on behalf of applicants:-

9. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that on the basis of false allegations, applicants have been made accused in the present matter after three years.

10. They further submitted that as per prosecutrix i.e. informant applicants committed rape upon her in November, 2021 but she lodged the FIR on 2.10.2024 and this fact clearly suggests that FIR is nothing but bundle of false facts.

11. They further submitted that however, informant tried to explain the delay in lodging the FIR by stating that as applicants were having political influence and therefore, she earlier could not lodge the FIR against them but on this ground, it cannot be said that she explained the delay of 3 years in lodging the FIR of the present case.

12. They further submitted that admittedly prosecutrix i.e. informant is married and major lady and story narrated by her in the FIR and in her both the statements recorded during investigation does not appear to be convincing and no prudent man can believe on such hypothetical version.

13. They further submitted that as applicants are sons of Iqbal who is Member of Parliament, therefore, due to political enmity, they have been roped in the present matter.

14. They further submitted that if applicants and other accused would have committed rape upon the informant then she would not have silently went home and she would have definitely disclosed this fact to someone.

15. They further submitted that three years silence of prosecutrix i.e. informant casts serious doubt upon the story narrated by her. 2 of 9

16. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant-Wazid (applicant No. 1 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 11540 of 2025) submitted that apart from the present case, however, applicant is having criminal history of as many as 16 cases but in all these cases he has been made accused only due to his political background.

17. He further submitted that entire criminal history of applicant-Wazid has been duly explained in paragraph Nos. 28 to 43 of the affidavit filed in support of his bail application. Details of which are as follows:- Srl. No. Case details Relates to offences Under sections Result

1. Case crime No. 318 of 447 IPC 2017

2. Case Crime No. 97 of 504, 506 IPC 2022

3. Case crime No. 177 of 2019

4. Case crime No. 1409 of 2017

5. Case crime No. 421 of 2024 420,504, 506 467, 448, 471 IPC 420, 468, 477A, 120-B 471 IPC & 629A Companies Act 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC

6. Case crime No. 196 of 420, 406, 506 IPC 2017

7. Case crime No. 286 of 307, 504, 506, 120B IPC 2022 Proceedings of the cases have been stayed. Arrest applicants been stayed. Proceedings both the cases quashed.

8. Case crime No. 313 of 2022

9. Case crime No. 181 of 2022

10. Case crime No. 178 of 2019 420, 504, 506, 386, 389, 120B IPC and 3(2)(5A) SC/ST Act 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 120B IPC 406, 342, 504, 506, 354 IPC

11. Case crime No. 245 of 406, 420 IPC 2019

12. Case crime No. 519 of 2021 420, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC

13. Case crime No. 83 of After investigation final report has been submitted. Released anticipatory bail. 2022 2/3 U.P. Gangsters Act In these cases 3 of 9

14. Case crime No. 457 of applicant is on bail. 2022

15. Case crime No. 24 of 376D, 342, 120B IPC 2023

16. Case crime No. 89 of 376, 506 IPC 2023

18. He further submitted that however, out of 16 cases two cases relate to the provisions of U.P. Gangsters Act and two cases are of rape but in all the four cases after considering entire facts of the case applicant-Wazid has been released on bail as these cases also based on false facts like present one.

19. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant-Alishan (applicant no. 2 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 11540 of 2025) submitted that apart from the present case applicant is although having criminal history of 12 other cases but his entire criminal history has also been duly explained from para-44 to 55 of the affidavit filed in support of his bail application. Details of which are as follows:- Srl. No. Case details

1. Case crime No. 246 of 2017 Offence under sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 354, 147, 148, 386, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC

2. Case crime No. 102 of 2022 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC

3. Case Crime No. 177 of 2019 420, 504, 506, 467, 468, 471 IPC Result Released Anticipatory Bail. Proceedings have been stayed. Case Crime No. 97 of 2022 504, 506 IPC Case crime no. 286 of 2022 307, 504, 506, 120 IPC Proceeding of the case has been quashed. Case crime No. 181 of 2022 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 120B IPC Final report has been submitted. Case crime No. 421 of 2024 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC Arrest of the applicant has been stayed. Case crime No. 83 of 2022 2/3 Gangsters Act

9. Case crime No. 457 of 2022 Released on bail. 4 of 9

10. Case crime No. 122 of 2022 376, 323, 354A IPC & 7/8 POCSO Act

11. Case crime No. 195 of 376 D, 506 IPC 2022

12. Case crime No.245 of 2022 376D, 342, 504, 323 IPC

20. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant-Afzal (applicant No. 3 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 11540 of 2025) submitted that however, apart from the present case applicant is also having criminal history of 8 cases but his entire criminal history has also been explained from para-56 to 63 of the affidavit. Details of which are as follows:- Srl. No.

6. Case details Relates to offences Under sections Result Case crime No. 181 of 2022 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 120B IPC Final report has been submitted. Case crime No. 421 of 2024 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC Arrest has been stayed. Case crime No. 286 of 2022 Case crime No. 83 of 2022 307, 504, 506, 120B IPC Proceeding has been quashed. 2/3 Gangsters Act Case crime No. 122 of 2022 376, 323, 354AIPC and 7/8 POCSO Act Case crime No. 195 of 2022 376D, 506 IPC Applicant released on bail

7. Case crime No. 245 of 376D, 342, 504, 323 IPC 2022

8. Case crime No. 89 of 2023 376, 506 IPC & ¾ POCSO Act

21. Learned counsel for applicants Alishan and Afzal submitted that however, both the applicants were also made accused in other cases of rape but in these cases also they have been made accused quite dramatically on the basis of false allegations and in these cases also they have been released on bail.

22. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant-Javed (applicant in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 8341 of 2025) submitted that applicant is also having criminal history of 19 other cases but his entire criminal history has also been duly explained in para Nos. 3 to 21 of the supplementary affidavit dated 10.3.2025 filed in support of his bail application. Details of which are as follows:- 5 of 9 Srl. No. Case details Relates to offences Under sections Result

9. Case crime No. 65 of 2018 403, 447, 506, 120B IPC Case crime No. 39 of 2018 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC Case crime No. 177 of 2019 420, 504, 506, 467, 468, 471 IPC Case crime No. 97 of 2022 504, 506, 386 IPC Case crime No. 421 of 2024 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC Case crime No. 246 of 2017 Case crime No. 226 of 2020 Case crime No. 1409 of 2017 452, 323, 504, 506, 354, 147, 148,386, 420, 467, 468 & 120B IPC 174A IPC 420, 468, 477 A, 471 IPC & 629 A Companies Act Case crime No. 519 of 2021 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC

10. Case crime No. 83 of 2/3 Gangsters Act 2022 Proceedings have been stayed. Applicant released on anticipatory bail by the court below. Applicant released on bail by the court below Proceeding has been stayed by this Court. Applicant has been released on Anticipatory bail by the Apex Court Applicant has been released on bail by the Apex Court.

11. Case crime No. 127 of 2022 420, 467, 468, 471, 342, 386, 504, 506 IPC Appeal has been allowed by the Apex Court.

12. Case crime No. 122 of 2022 376,323, 354Ka IPC & 7/8 POCSO Act Applicant is on bail by the court below.

13. Case crime No. 195 of 376D IPC 2022

14. Case crime No. 181 of 2022 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 120B IPC Final report has been submitted.

15. Case crime No. 457 of 2/3 Gangsters Act 2022

16. Case crime No. 245 of 2022 376D, 342, 504, 323 IPC Applicant has been released on bail by this 6 of 9

17. Case crime No. 24 of 376D, 342, 120B IPC Court. 2023

18. Case crime No. 286 of 2022

19. Case crime No. 625 of 2022 307, 504, 506, 120B IPC 307, 504, 506, 120B IPC Entire proceeding of the summoning order has been quashed.

23. He further submitted that however, applicant-Javed also made accused in four other cases of rape but in these cases he is on bail and these cases were also lodged on false allegations like present case.

24. Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that after perusing entire criminal antecedents of the applicants it is apparent that they have been falsely made accused in all the cases like present one and on the basis of such criminal antecedents of the applicants, it is not proper to withheld their bail applications considering their political background and Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

25. They further submitted that applicants are in jail since 5.10.2024 i.e. for last ten months. Submission made on behalf of the State-

26. Per contra, learned AAG appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicants are very influential persons, therefore, earlier prosecutrix could not make complaint against them but when she came to know that some other victims like her lodged FIR against them then she gathered some courage and thereafter she lodged FIR of the present case and considering the political influence of the applicants, it cannot be said that there is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR of the present case.

27. He further submitted that even merely on the ground of delay in lodging the FIR, entire prosecution case including statements of the victim recorded during investigation cannot be disbelieved.

28. He further submitted that it is a case of gang rape and being employer of the prosecturix, applicants committed rape upon her and being their maid under their pressure and influence poor prosecutrix earlier could neither make any complaint at that time nor she could immediately lodge FIR against them.

29. He further submitted that even all the applicants are hardened criminals and they frequently misused their position and however, in some cases proceedings have been quashed and final reports have been submitted and in remaining cases they are either on anticipatory bail or on bail but considering their criminal antecedents, there is every possibility that after release on bail, they will again commit such serious offences of rape by exploiting innocent girls. He next submits, even apart from present case applicants are also having criminal history of other cases of rape. 7 of 9

30. He further submitted that after perusing their criminal antecedents, it is apparent that they misused the liberty of bail and anticipatory bail granted to them.

31. He further submitted that therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case including long criminal antecedents of the applicants they are not entitled to be released on bail. Analysis:-

32. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

33. It is a case of gang rape and as per allegations, applicants committed rape upon the prosecutrix who was their maid but it reflects as per prosecutrix, applicants committed rape upon her in the Month of November, 2021 and she lodged the FIR of the present case on 2.10.2024 i.e. after about 3 years and therefore, there is huge delay of three years in lodging the FIR of the present case.

34. Further, however, prosecutrix tried to explain the above delay by stating that applicants are highly influential persons and therefore, she immediately could not lodge the FIR against them and when she came to know that some other victims have lodged FIRs against them then she gathered courage and lodged FIR of the present case but merely on the basis of above explanation, at this stage, it cannot be said that she has explained the delay of three years in lodging the FIR of the present case.

35. Further, admittedly prosecutrix i.e. informant of the case is major and married lady and however, she was maid of the applicants but story narrated by her in the FIR as well as in her both the statements recorded during investigation, prima facie, does not appear to be convincing. No matter how serious the allegations are, the allegations cannot be accepted blindly without analysing them.

36. In view of this Court, the delay of three years in lodging the FIR of the present case and the story narrated by prosecutrix, prima facie casts serious doubt on the entire prosecution case.

37. Further, however, applicants are having huge criminal history to their credit but their entire criminal antecedents have been duly explained in their respective bail applications and in their respective supplementary affidavits.

38. Further, however, from the criminal history of applicants it reflects, they were also made accused in some rape cases but in these cases they are on bail. Considering their bail orders which have been annexed alongwith their bail applications, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants that in these cases also they have been falsely made accused like present one, cannot be completely ruled out.

39. Further, however, except the cases of rape, applicants have also been made accused in two cases of U.P. Gangsters Act but in these cases also they are on bail. The other remaining cases do not appear to be cases relate to heinous offences and 8 of 9 in number of cases either proceedings have been stayed or quashed or they are on anticipatory bail.

40. Further, while deciding the bail application of an accused the Court should consider that whether facts and circumstances of the case in which he is seeking bail as well as of the cases relate to his criminal history, prima facie, indicate towards his false implication or not.

41. In case at hand, considering political background of the applicants and manner of their implication in the present case, in view of this Court, it would be not proper to withheld their bail applications merely on the ground of their criminal antecedents.

42. Further, however, while considering bail application of an accused his criminal antecedents are having its own importance but if otherwise case of bail is made out then merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, ordinarily bail application of an accused should not be dismissed.

43. Further, applicants are in jail since October, 2024 i.e. for last more than ten months and law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and his bail application should not be dismissed for punitive purpose.

44. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

45. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail applications are allowed.

46. Let the applicants-Javed, Wajid, Alishan and Afzal be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless their personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

47. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicants.

48. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date:-12.08.2025 Ankita 9 of 9 ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad