High Court · 2025

2. Heard Sri Krishna Kant Dubey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Lavkush Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. Sri Abhay Raj, learned counsel for the first informant is not present even when the matter is taken in the revised list.

4. Even previously on 22.07.2025 learned counsel for the first informant was not present in the revised list, as a last opportunity the matter was adjourned and it was made clear that the matter will not be adjourned on the next date as a matter of right. The following order was passed on the said date:- "1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Lavkush Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ramesh Shukla, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

3. Sri Abhay Raj, learned counsel for the first informant is not present even in the revised list despite his name being printed in the cause list. His vakalatnama is not on the record. Office to trace it out and place it on the record by the next date.

4. As a last opportunity, the matter is adjourned for today.

5. List on 12.08.2025 as fresh.

6. It is made clear that the matter will not be adjourned on the next date as a matter of right."

5. Today again in the revised list learned counsel for the first informant is not present. The Court thus proceeds to hear the matter.

6. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Beetu Yadav @ Shyamveer, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 25 of 2025, under Sections 87, 70(1), 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Bakewar, District Etawah.

7. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 25.01.2025 by Sushil Kumar against the applicant, Sudhir @ Kallu Yadav and Udaiveer Singh alleging therein that on 17.01.2025 at about 9.30 am his wife aged about 24 years stated of going to take medicines but did not return till late night. She was searched but could not be traced. While going from the house she has taken away jewellery of about 8-10 lakhs. He lodged a missing report on 18.01.2025. Later on he came to know that the accused persons lured and enticed away his wife. His report be lodged and action be taken.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is the friend of co- accused Sudhir @ Kallu Yadav with whom the victim was having relationship and friendship. It is submitted that the victim states of being friend with Kallu through Facebook and states that she went with him and established physical relationship with him out of her own sweet-will but later on the applicant also established physical relationship with her forcibly. It is submitted that the present case is a case of consent. It is submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of one case, paragraph 12 of the affidavit has been placed as the disclosure of the same and paragraph 4 of the supplementary affidavit dated 08.08.2025 which is already on record as the explanation thereof. While placing paragraph 03 of the said supplementary affidavit it is submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and charge-sheet has been submitted. The applicant is in jail since 18.04.2025.

9. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

10. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim is a major and a married woman. She was having relationship with co-accused Kallu. She went from the house after taking huge amount of jewellery. The case appears to be a case of consent.

11. 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.

12. Let the applicant- Beetu Yadav @ Shyamveer, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties 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 B.N.S.S., 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 B.N.S., 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 B.N.S.S., 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 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

13. 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.

14. The bail application is allowed.

15. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 12.8.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Krishna Kant Dubey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Lavkush Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. Sri Abhay Raj, learned counsel for the first informant is not present even when the matter is taken in the revised list.

4. Even previously on 22.07.2025 learned counsel for the first informant was not present in the revised list, as a last opportunity the matter was adjourned and it was made clear that the matter will not be adjourned on the next date as a matter of right. The following order was passed on the said date:- "1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Lavkush Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ramesh Shukla, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

3. Sri Abhay Raj, learned counsel for the first informant is not present even in the revised list despite his name being printed in the cause list. His vakalatnama is not on the record. Office to trace it out and place it on the record by the next date.

4. As a last opportunity, the matter is adjourned for today.

5. List on 12.08.2025 as fresh.

6. It is made clear that the matter will not be adjourned on the next date as a matter of right."

5. Today again in the revised list learned counsel for the first informant is not present. The Court thus proceeds to hear the matter.

6. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Beetu Yadav @ Shyamveer, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 25 of 2025, under Sections 87, 70(1), 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Bakewar, District Etawah.

7. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 25.01.2025 by Sushil Kumar against the applicant, Sudhir @ Kallu Yadav and Udaiveer Singh alleging therein that on 17.01.2025 at about 9.30 am his wife aged about 24 years stated of going to take medicines but did not return till late night. She was searched but could not be traced. While going from the house she has taken away jewellery of about 8-10 lakhs. He lodged a missing report on 18.01.2025. Later on he came to know that the accused persons lured and enticed away his wife. His report be lodged and action be taken.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is the friend of co- accused Sudhir @ Kallu Yadav with whom the victim was having relationship and friendship. It is submitted that the victim states of being friend with Kallu through Facebook and states that she went with him and established physical relationship with him out of her own sweet-will but later on the applicant also established physical relationship with her forcibly. It is submitted that the present case is a case of consent. It is submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of one case, paragraph 12 of the affidavit has been placed as the disclosure of the same and paragraph 4 of the supplementary affidavit dated 08.08.2025 which is already on record as the explanation thereof. While placing paragraph 03 of the said supplementary affidavit it is submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and charge-sheet has been submitted. The applicant is in jail since 18.04.2025.

9. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

10. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim is a major and a married woman. She was having relationship with co-accused Kallu. She went from the house after taking huge amount of jewellery. The case appears to be a case of consent.

11. 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.

12. Let the applicant- Beetu Yadav @ Shyamveer, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties 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 B.N.S.S., 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 B.N.S., 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 B.N.S.S., 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 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

13. 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.

14. The bail application is allowed.

15. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 12.8.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad