High Court · 2025

1. Heard Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gyan Narayan Kannaujiya, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material placed on record.

2. This is second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application has been rejected by this Court on 06.05.2025.

3. The second bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Stephan, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 130/2024, under Section- 376-D, 302, 323, 328, 506 of I.P.C., and section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Hanumanganj, District Kushinagar.

4. There are allegations in the F.I.R., lodged by the mother of the victim, that she is poor and helpless woman. On 30/01.06.2024 at about 01:00 a.m. in the night her daughter went outside the house to ease herself. There the applicant and co-accused, Angad, gagged her mouth and took her to the agricultural field where they committed offence of rape against her. She is student of class 9th. After catching her hands and legs they forcibly poured some poisonous substance in her mouth and beated her. When her daughter started raising alarm, then Munna Yadav, @ Lakdu Yadav, ran towards her. On seeing him, the applicant and co-accused vanished. After the victim came to her house she informed about the entire incident and the fact that her physical condition is deteriorating because of the poisonous substances administered to her.

5. Informant took her to Ravindra Nagar Hospital, immediately where she could not get any relief and she was referred to Medical College, Gorakhpur, where her condition was serious and there was remote possibility of survival. After entrusting her relatives to look after her daughter she went to lodge the report against the applicant and co-accused, who had threatened her of dire consequence in case she opens her mouth.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the prosecution story as alleged in the FIR is absolutely false. He has pointed out that as per the FIR, incident took place in the night of 30/01.06.2024, where it is alleged that the victim was administered poison by the applicant and other co-accused. He has pointed out that the informant has admitted in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that on 01.07.2024, the victim went to her school and this fact has also been certified by the Headmaster of the school in his statement dated 09.07.2024 recorded in C.D. No.4. He has further submitted that in case the deceased was administered poison by the applicant and co- accused in the intervening night of 30/01.06.2024, how she attended the school has not been explained. From the "Inpatient Hospital Registration Form" of the deceased, it is clear that she was admitted in B.R.D. Medical College, Gorakhpur on 02.07.2024 at 10:00 am. At the time of admission, it was informed by the informant to the doctor that the deceased was made to consume poison forcefully due to some conflict between two families around 1:00 am on 03.07.2024, when it is alleged in the FIR that it was done on 30/01.07.2024 by the applicant and co-accused.

7. From the statement of the deceased recorded by the Investigating Officer, it is clear that the applicant, co-accused Angad and two other boys finding the victim alone, touched her body inappropriately and administered her poison. In dying declaration allegedly recorded by the police, in the presence of Dr. Amil H. Khan and officiating Magistrate, Sri Himanshu Singh, Naib Tahsildar, Sadar Gorakhpur, she stated that she had gone to fetch water in the night when the applicant, Govind, Angad and Rohit came. They had kept something in a box, which they made her drink, thereafter, she does not remembers anything. Learned counsel for the applicant has made specific averment in the bail application that the Investigating Officer has neither recorded the statement of the doctor nor officiating Magistrate in the case diary.

8. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State, no reply has been given to the aforesaid averments. Counsel for applicant has further submitted that the original copy of the alleged dying declaration of the deceased is also not available, which has also not been denied by the State in the counter affidavit.

9. Learned counsel for the applicant has made averment in the bail application that there was love affair of the deceased with Govind Yadav and because of the aforesaid affair between two, dispute of the victim took place with her family members in the night of 1/2.07.2024 and she consumed herbicide kept in her house for agricultural purposes and, thereafter, informant cooked up false story and implicated the applicant because of neighborly dispute with him. Applicant is in jail since 14.07.2024 and has criminal history of three cases of minor nature explained in paragraph 75 of the bail application.

10. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

11. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fail to appears 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 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 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.

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

13. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Mini MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gyan Narayan Kannaujiya, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material placed on record.

2. This is second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application has been rejected by this Court on 06.05.2025.

3. The second bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Stephan, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 130/2024, under Section- 376-D, 302, 323, 328, 506 of I.P.C., and section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Hanumanganj, District Kushinagar.

4. There are allegations in the F.I.R., lodged by the mother of the victim, that she is poor and helpless woman. On 30/01.06.2024 at about 01:00 a.m. in the night her daughter went outside the house to ease herself. There the applicant and co-accused, Angad, gagged her mouth and took her to the agricultural field where they committed offence of rape against her. She is student of class 9th. After catching her hands and legs they forcibly poured some poisonous substance in her mouth and beated her. When her daughter started raising alarm, then Munna Yadav, @ Lakdu Yadav, ran towards her. On seeing him, the applicant and co-accused vanished. After the victim came to her house she informed about the entire incident and the fact that her physical condition is deteriorating because of the poisonous substances administered to her.

5. Informant took her to Ravindra Nagar Hospital, immediately where she could not get any relief and she was referred to Medical College, Gorakhpur, where her condition was serious and there was remote possibility of survival. After entrusting her relatives to look after her daughter she went to lodge the report against the applicant and co-accused, who had threatened her of dire consequence in case she opens her mouth.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the prosecution story as alleged in the FIR is absolutely false. He has pointed out that as per the FIR, incident took place in the night of 30/01.06.2024, where it is alleged that the victim was administered poison by the applicant and other co-accused. He has pointed out that the informant has admitted in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that on 01.07.2024, the victim went to her school and this fact has also been certified by the Headmaster of the school in his statement dated 09.07.2024 recorded in C.D. No.4. He has further submitted that in case the deceased was administered poison by the applicant and co- accused in the intervening night of 30/01.06.2024, how she attended the school has not been explained. From the "Inpatient Hospital Registration Form" of the deceased, it is clear that she was admitted in B.R.D. Medical College, Gorakhpur on 02.07.2024 at 10:00 am. At the time of admission, it was informed by the informant to the doctor that the deceased was made to consume poison forcefully due to some conflict between two families around 1:00 am on 03.07.2024, when it is alleged in the FIR that it was done on 30/01.07.2024 by the applicant and co-accused.

7. From the statement of the deceased recorded by the Investigating Officer, it is clear that the applicant, co-accused Angad and two other boys finding the victim alone, touched her body inappropriately and administered her poison. In dying declaration allegedly recorded by the police, in the presence of Dr. Amil H. Khan and officiating Magistrate, Sri Himanshu Singh, Naib Tahsildar, Sadar Gorakhpur, she stated that she had gone to fetch water in the night when the applicant, Govind, Angad and Rohit came. They had kept something in a box, which they made her drink, thereafter, she does not remembers anything. Learned counsel for the applicant has made specific averment in the bail application that the Investigating Officer has neither recorded the statement of the doctor nor officiating Magistrate in the case diary.

8. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State, no reply has been given to the aforesaid averments. Counsel for applicant has further submitted that the original copy of the alleged dying declaration of the deceased is also not available, which has also not been denied by the State in the counter affidavit.

9. Learned counsel for the applicant has made averment in the bail application that there was love affair of the deceased with Govind Yadav and because of the aforesaid affair between two, dispute of the victim took place with her family members in the night of 1/2.07.2024 and she consumed herbicide kept in her house for agricultural purposes and, thereafter, informant cooked up false story and implicated the applicant because of neighborly dispute with him. Applicant is in jail since 14.07.2024 and has criminal history of three cases of minor nature explained in paragraph 75 of the bail application.

10. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

11. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fail to appears 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 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 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.

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

13. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Mini MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad