State of U.P v. Party

2. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Samarth Sinha, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. The Vakalatnama of Sri Samarth Sinha, learned counsel for the first informant is not on record. Office to trace out the same and place it on record by the next date and make a note in the order-sheet about it.

4. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Lalit, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 182 of 2025, under Sections 333, 64(1), 316(2), 127(2), 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Hapur Dehat, District Hapur.

5. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on

27.05.2025 by the victim against the applicant and Naipal alleging therein that she was married to Jaivind and was very happy with her marriage. She has two children. Lalit a milk vendor used to visit her house. Around four months back when her husband has gone on his duty he entered in her house and on threat of country-made pistol committed rape upon her. He clicked her nude photographs. He then on threat to make them viral continued rape on her many times. On 03.04.2025 he called her in a hotel on the pretext of deleting the photographs and committed rape upon her. He also involved co- accused Naipal with him who has taken Rs. 1,00,000/- from her. On 14.05.2025 he told her that when her husband comes she may mix the 2 BAIL No. 26286 of 2025 medicine and give it to her husband then he will delete the photographs. She did the same after which in the night Lalit came to her house and took Rs. 10 lakhs and ornaments of gold and silver with him and told her to accompany him to the hotel then he will delete her photographs there. She went with him where he confined her and committed rape upon her. On 25.05.2025 somehow she got an opportunity and came back. Her report be lodged and action be taken.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim is a married woman. It is submitted that the present case is a case of consent. The entire prosecution story is a concocted story just to falsely implicate the applicant. It is submitted that first information report has been lodged after an inordinate delay since the first act of rape is stated to have committed around 04 months back but no complaint was made either by the victim or by her family members to any authorities. It is submitted that the victim went to the hotel twice and even stayed there for about 10 days which is public place without any objection or resentment. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 22 of the affidavit and is in jail since

11.06.2025.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

8. 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 went with the applicant to hotel twice and even stayed there for 10 days without any objection or resentment. The first act of rape was around four months back which was not reported.

9. 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.

10. Let the applicant- Lalit, 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 3 BAIL No. 26286 of 2025 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.

11. 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.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 9, 2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Samarth Sinha, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. The Vakalatnama of Sri Samarth Sinha, learned counsel for the first informant is not on record. Office to trace out the same and place it on record by the next date and make a note in the order-sheet about it.

4. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Lalit, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 182 of 2025, under Sections 333, 64(1), 316(2), 127(2), 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Hapur Dehat, District Hapur.

5. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on

27.05.2025 by the victim against the applicant and Naipal alleging therein that she was married to Jaivind and was very happy with her marriage. She has two children. Lalit a milk vendor used to visit her house. Around four months back when her husband has gone on his duty he entered in her house and on threat of country-made pistol committed rape upon her. He clicked her nude photographs. He then on threat to make them viral continued rape on her many times. On 03.04.2025 he called her in a hotel on the pretext of deleting the photographs and committed rape upon her. He also involved co- accused Naipal with him who has taken Rs. 1,00,000/- from her. On 14.05.2025 he told her that when her husband comes she may mix the 2 BAIL No. 26286 of 2025 medicine and give it to her husband then he will delete the photographs. She did the same after which in the night Lalit came to her house and took Rs. 10 lakhs and ornaments of gold and silver with him and told her to accompany him to the hotel then he will delete her photographs there. She went with him where he confined her and committed rape upon her. On 25.05.2025 somehow she got an opportunity and came back. Her report be lodged and action be taken.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim is a married woman. It is submitted that the present case is a case of consent. The entire prosecution story is a concocted story just to falsely implicate the applicant. It is submitted that first information report has been lodged after an inordinate delay since the first act of rape is stated to have committed around 04 months back but no complaint was made either by the victim or by her family members to any authorities. It is submitted that the victim went to the hotel twice and even stayed there for about 10 days which is public place without any objection or resentment. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 22 of the affidavit and is in jail since

11.06.2025.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

8. 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 went with the applicant to hotel twice and even stayed there for 10 days without any objection or resentment. The first act of rape was around four months back which was not reported.

9. 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.

10. Let the applicant- Lalit, 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 3 BAIL No. 26286 of 2025 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.

11. 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.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 9, 2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad