Heard Sri Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the v. D. Ojha

2. Heard Sri Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V. D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Lokendra Saini, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 209 of 2025, under Sections 376, 323, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Chandpur, District Bijnor.

4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 14.04.2025 by the victim under Sections 376, 377, 313, 323, 506 I.P.C. on the basis of an application moved under Section 173(4) BNSS alleging therein that she is aged about 21 years and was working in computer centre. On 12.09.2022 at about 05:00 pm the applicant came to the said centre and committed rape upon her after the children had gone. He had made a video of the same and on blackmailing her on threat of making it viral on internet continued to commit rape upon her. In the meantime, she became pregnant and the said pregnancy was got aborted by the applicant. He indulged in unnatural sex with her. On 06.02.2023 she has been married and on 19.07.2024 she was having a pregnancy of about 9 months. She is terrified. She gave an application to the police but no action was taken. Subsequently, she gave an application to the SSP concerned on 19.07.2024 on which also no action was taken. Then on 20.09.2024 the present application under Section 173(4) BNSS has been filed. Report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the FIR has been lodged on the basis of an application under Section 173(4) BNSS after an unexplained delay inasmuch as the first incident of rape is reported to be of 12.09.2022 but the application has been moved on 20.09.2024 which is after about more than two years. It is submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge sheet dated 06.06.2025 has been submitted against the applicant under Sections 323, 506, 376 IPC wherein the Investigating Officer has deleted the Sections 377, 313 IPC during investigation. It is submitted while placing para 22 of the affidavit that no such video or photographs of the victim has been recovered during investigation. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 24 of the affidavit and is in jail since 31.05.2025.

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

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that an application under Section 173(4) BNSS has been moved after about more than two years of the date of the first incident of rape as alleged. No such video or photographs of the victim has been recovered by the police during investigation. The victim is a major girl. Investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge sheet has been submitted.

8. 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.

9. Let the applicant Lokendra Saini, 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 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.

10. 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.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 11.8.2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V. D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Lokendra Saini, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 209 of 2025, under Sections 376, 323, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Chandpur, District Bijnor.

4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 14.04.2025 by the victim under Sections 376, 377, 313, 323, 506 I.P.C. on the basis of an application moved under Section 173(4) BNSS alleging therein that she is aged about 21 years and was working in computer centre. On 12.09.2022 at about 05:00 pm the applicant came to the said centre and committed rape upon her after the children had gone. He had made a video of the same and on blackmailing her on threat of making it viral on internet continued to commit rape upon her. In the meantime, she became pregnant and the said pregnancy was got aborted by the applicant. He indulged in unnatural sex with her. On 06.02.2023 she has been married and on 19.07.2024 she was having a pregnancy of about 9 months. She is terrified. She gave an application to the police but no action was taken. Subsequently, she gave an application to the SSP concerned on 19.07.2024 on which also no action was taken. Then on 20.09.2024 the present application under Section 173(4) BNSS has been filed. Report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the FIR has been lodged on the basis of an application under Section 173(4) BNSS after an unexplained delay inasmuch as the first incident of rape is reported to be of 12.09.2022 but the application has been moved on 20.09.2024 which is after about more than two years. It is submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge sheet dated 06.06.2025 has been submitted against the applicant under Sections 323, 506, 376 IPC wherein the Investigating Officer has deleted the Sections 377, 313 IPC during investigation. It is submitted while placing para 22 of the affidavit that no such video or photographs of the victim has been recovered during investigation. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 24 of the affidavit and is in jail since 31.05.2025.

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

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that an application under Section 173(4) BNSS has been moved after about more than two years of the date of the first incident of rape as alleged. No such video or photographs of the victim has been recovered by the police during investigation. The victim is a major girl. Investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge sheet has been submitted.

8. 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.

9. Let the applicant Lokendra Saini, 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 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.

10. 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.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 11.8.2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad