State of U.P v. Party

2. Heard Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

3. Learned A.G.A. submits that he has received instructions to the supplementary affidavit dated 01.09.2025 for which time was prayed and was granted on 04.09.2025.

4. This is the second bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Sanoj Kushwaha, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.282 of 2023, under Section(s) 366, 376D I.P.C. registered at P.S. Sevrahi, District- Kushinagar.

5. The first bail application of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 21694 of 2025 was dismissed for want of prosecution on

2.7.2025.

6. The F.I.R. of the matter was lodged on 17.7.2023 by Govind Verma against three unknown persons travelling in a pick-up vehicle alleging therein that on 16.7.2023 he along with his wife were returning from feast wherein three persons in a pick-up hit his motorcycle due to which he and his wife fell down. The accused persons then took away his wife and 2 BAIL No. 25763 of 2025 enraged her modesty, after which his wife somehow ran from the place. A report be lodged and action be taken.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. It is submitted that the victim during investigation in her statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. improves the prosecution version and added the factum that four persons picked her in a vehicle and then took her away to a lonely place where they committed rape upon her. It is submitted that the same is only with an intention to give the case a different colour. It is submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. states that 04 persons committed rape upon her and her back of the body was completely scratched. It is submitted that the doctor before whom the victim was taken for medical examination, although examined her externally but did not find any injury on her body. It is submitted that the victim refused her internal medical examination. The allegation of injuries on the back of the victim does not find corroboration from the medical evidence. It is submitted that subsequently co-accused Saddam and Satish Yadav were arrested on 19.7.2023 who in their confessional statements stated of participation of the applicant(Sanoj Kushwaha) and Arvind Yadav also with them. It is submitted that as such name of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional statements of the co-accused which is inadmissible piece of evidence. It is submitted that the victim did not name the applicant and the other accused persons in her statements recorded during investigation. It is submitted that no test identification of the applicant and the co-accused persons have been conducted. It is submitted that charge sheet dated 09.09.2023 has been filed against the applicant, para-22 and annexure no. 11 to the affidavit have been placed for the same. It is submitted that the co-accused Saddam, Satish Yadav and Arvind Yadav have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.8.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1226 of 2024, vide order dated 1.10.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.46472 of 2023 and vide order dated 19.9.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.17488 of 2024 respectively, the copies of the said bail orders have been collectively annexed as annexure 3 BAIL No. 25763 of 2025 no. 13 to the affidavit. It is argued that the applicant has 06 other criminal antecedents which have been disclosed and explained in para-19 in which he is bailed out, copies of the bail orders have been collectively annexed as annexure no. 8 to the affidavit. He is in jail since 19.7.2023.

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

9. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. Implication of the applicant has surfaced in the matter on the basis of disclosure of his name in the confessional statements of the co-accused Saddam and Satish Yadav. The medical evidence does not corroborate with the prosecution version. Co-accused Saddam, Satish Yadav and Arvind Yadav have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. No test identification of the accused in the matter has been done.

10. 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.

11. Let the applicant- Sanoj Kushwaha, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (out of which one surety should be the family member of the applicant and the other surety should be a 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 4 BAIL No. 25763 of 2025 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 82 Cr.P.C., 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 174-A I.P.C. (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 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

12. 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.

13. The bail application is allowed.

14. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 18, 2025 Naresh (Samit Gopal,J.) NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

3. Learned A.G.A. submits that he has received instructions to the supplementary affidavit dated 01.09.2025 for which time was prayed and was granted on 04.09.2025.

4. This is the second bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Sanoj Kushwaha, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.282 of 2023, under Section(s) 366, 376D I.P.C. registered at P.S. Sevrahi, District- Kushinagar.

5. The first bail application of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 21694 of 2025 was dismissed for want of prosecution on

2.7.2025.

6. The F.I.R. of the matter was lodged on 17.7.2023 by Govind Verma against three unknown persons travelling in a pick-up vehicle alleging therein that on 16.7.2023 he along with his wife were returning from feast wherein three persons in a pick-up hit his motorcycle due to which he and his wife fell down. The accused persons then took away his wife and 2 BAIL No. 25763 of 2025 enraged her modesty, after which his wife somehow ran from the place. A report be lodged and action be taken.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. It is submitted that the victim during investigation in her statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. improves the prosecution version and added the factum that four persons picked her in a vehicle and then took her away to a lonely place where they committed rape upon her. It is submitted that the same is only with an intention to give the case a different colour. It is submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. states that 04 persons committed rape upon her and her back of the body was completely scratched. It is submitted that the doctor before whom the victim was taken for medical examination, although examined her externally but did not find any injury on her body. It is submitted that the victim refused her internal medical examination. The allegation of injuries on the back of the victim does not find corroboration from the medical evidence. It is submitted that subsequently co-accused Saddam and Satish Yadav were arrested on 19.7.2023 who in their confessional statements stated of participation of the applicant(Sanoj Kushwaha) and Arvind Yadav also with them. It is submitted that as such name of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional statements of the co-accused which is inadmissible piece of evidence. It is submitted that the victim did not name the applicant and the other accused persons in her statements recorded during investigation. It is submitted that no test identification of the applicant and the co-accused persons have been conducted. It is submitted that charge sheet dated 09.09.2023 has been filed against the applicant, para-22 and annexure no. 11 to the affidavit have been placed for the same. It is submitted that the co-accused Saddam, Satish Yadav and Arvind Yadav have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.8.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1226 of 2024, vide order dated 1.10.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.46472 of 2023 and vide order dated 19.9.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.17488 of 2024 respectively, the copies of the said bail orders have been collectively annexed as annexure 3 BAIL No. 25763 of 2025 no. 13 to the affidavit. It is argued that the applicant has 06 other criminal antecedents which have been disclosed and explained in para-19 in which he is bailed out, copies of the bail orders have been collectively annexed as annexure no. 8 to the affidavit. He is in jail since 19.7.2023.

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

9. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. Implication of the applicant has surfaced in the matter on the basis of disclosure of his name in the confessional statements of the co-accused Saddam and Satish Yadav. The medical evidence does not corroborate with the prosecution version. Co-accused Saddam, Satish Yadav and Arvind Yadav have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. No test identification of the accused in the matter has been done.

10. 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.

11. Let the applicant- Sanoj Kushwaha, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (out of which one surety should be the family member of the applicant and the other surety should be a 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 4 BAIL No. 25763 of 2025 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 82 Cr.P.C., 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 174-A I.P.C. (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 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

12. 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.

13. The bail application is allowed.

14. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 18, 2025 Naresh (Samit Gopal,J.) NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad