High Court · 2025

2. Heard Sri Rayoof Ali, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Utkarsh Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 23 of 2025, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 506, 395, 376D of IPC,, Police Station - Khalilabad, District - Sant Kabir Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

4. As per prosecution story, the applicant along with four other named accused persons and three unknown persons is stated to have committed gang rape with the victim on 23.05.2024 at about 12 Noon in the agricultural field whereby several shepherds are stated to be grazing their cattles there and on seeing them, the applicant and other co-accused persons are stated to have run away from the place of occurrence after threatening her. The accused persons are stated to be armed with weapons. The accused persons are also stated to have snatched away her ornaments.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about seven months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Even the application u/s 154(3) Cr.P.C. has been moved after a delay, as such, it is a clear cut case of false implication.

6. Learned counsel has also stated that another factor that has to be considered is that the father and son duo have been implicated in the case of gang rape which cannot be believed in Indian Society. The victim is a married lady and she is 35 years old as per her own statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 06.03.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application and has placed much reliance upon the statement of the accused persons and has stated that they were confessed their crime. The applicant and other co- accused persons have snatched away the ornaments of the victim and had committed gang rape with her.

8. Learned counsel for the informant has further stated that the informant has approached several authorities for taking action against the accused persons but no action had been taken against them. She had filed a Writ Petition No. 20739 of 2024 before this Court wherein the following order was passed on 10.12.2024:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer: "(A) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned notice dated 22.07.2024 prepared by the respondent no. 3. (B) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.register first information report on application supported on affidavit dated 12.07.2024."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the impugned notice dated 22.07.2024 which has been prepared by the respondent No.3, is unsustainable in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Lalita Kumari vs. State of U.P. and others, (2014) 2 SCC 1 (Para-110).

4. Before proceeding further on merit, let respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 may file affidavit in the matter on or before the date fixed.

5. List this matter again in top ten cases on 19.12.2024."

9. Subsequently, on 07.01.2025, the following order has been passed in the said writ petition:- "1. On the request of the learned A.G.A., the matter is adjourned. Suffice it to indicate on or before the next date fixed, the order dated 10-12-2024 is to be complied with.

2. List this matter again on 27-01-2025 in top ten of the cases. "

10. Learned counsel for the informant has next stated that pursuant to the said orders passed in writ petition, the instant FIR could be instituted otherwise, seeing the clout of the applicant and other co-accused persons, the case would have gone unattended.

11. Learned AGA has also opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact of delay of about seven months in lodging the FIR from the date of incident and even delay in moving the application before the S.P. concerned and also the fact that the victim has not sustained any injuries on her body coupled by the fact that the FIR is self- contradictory as on one hand, she has levelled the allegations of gang rape and on the other hand, she has stated that she has been robbed of her ornaments, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed.

13. Let the applicant- Mukesh, who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

14. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

15. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date:- 24.4.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Rayoof Ali, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Utkarsh Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 23 of 2025, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 506, 395, 376D of IPC,, Police Station - Khalilabad, District - Sant Kabir Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

4. As per prosecution story, the applicant along with four other named accused persons and three unknown persons is stated to have committed gang rape with the victim on 23.05.2024 at about 12 Noon in the agricultural field whereby several shepherds are stated to be grazing their cattles there and on seeing them, the applicant and other co-accused persons are stated to have run away from the place of occurrence after threatening her. The accused persons are stated to be armed with weapons. The accused persons are also stated to have snatched away her ornaments.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about seven months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Even the application u/s 154(3) Cr.P.C. has been moved after a delay, as such, it is a clear cut case of false implication.

6. Learned counsel has also stated that another factor that has to be considered is that the father and son duo have been implicated in the case of gang rape which cannot be believed in Indian Society. The victim is a married lady and she is 35 years old as per her own statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 06.03.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application and has placed much reliance upon the statement of the accused persons and has stated that they were confessed their crime. The applicant and other co- accused persons have snatched away the ornaments of the victim and had committed gang rape with her.

8. Learned counsel for the informant has further stated that the informant has approached several authorities for taking action against the accused persons but no action had been taken against them. She had filed a Writ Petition No. 20739 of 2024 before this Court wherein the following order was passed on 10.12.2024:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer: "(A) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned notice dated 22.07.2024 prepared by the respondent no. 3. (B) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.register first information report on application supported on affidavit dated 12.07.2024."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the impugned notice dated 22.07.2024 which has been prepared by the respondent No.3, is unsustainable in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Lalita Kumari vs. State of U.P. and others, (2014) 2 SCC 1 (Para-110).

4. Before proceeding further on merit, let respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 may file affidavit in the matter on or before the date fixed.

5. List this matter again in top ten cases on 19.12.2024."

9. Subsequently, on 07.01.2025, the following order has been passed in the said writ petition:- "1. On the request of the learned A.G.A., the matter is adjourned. Suffice it to indicate on or before the next date fixed, the order dated 10-12-2024 is to be complied with.

2. List this matter again on 27-01-2025 in top ten of the cases. "

10. Learned counsel for the informant has next stated that pursuant to the said orders passed in writ petition, the instant FIR could be instituted otherwise, seeing the clout of the applicant and other co-accused persons, the case would have gone unattended.

11. Learned AGA has also opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact of delay of about seven months in lodging the FIR from the date of incident and even delay in moving the application before the S.P. concerned and also the fact that the victim has not sustained any injuries on her body coupled by the fact that the FIR is self- contradictory as on one hand, she has levelled the allegations of gang rape and on the other hand, she has stated that she has been robbed of her ornaments, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed.

13. Let the applicant- Mukesh, who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

14. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

15. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date:- 24.4.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad