State of U.P v. Party

1. Heard Sri Skand Bajpayee, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Jayant Rai, learned counsel for the applicant through video conferencing, Mohd. Zafar Yaqub Khan, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Shahroz Khan, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Virendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State, who are present in Court and records have been perused.

2. F.I.R. of the matter which was lodged on 16.06.2024 by Smt. Indravati Devi against the applicant alleging therein that her daughter aged about 19 years was lured and her objectionable photographs were clicked by the applicant. He then on the strength of said photographs established physical relationship with her and was pressing her for marriage. On a complaint, he used to abuse them and threatened them with life. He is continuing the same since the last two years. Previously, due to fear and social reasons, she did not make complaint against him. But now after being annoyed, she is making a complaint.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that first informant has clearly stated in the F.I.R. that victim is a major girl aged about 19 years. It is submitted that relationship with the applicant and victim was continuing since long, but no complaint earlier was made either by the victim or her family members. It is submitted further while placing supplementary affidavit dated 19.03.2025 that the first informant Smt. Indravati Devi was examined as PW-1 before the trial court, who in her examination-in-chief, although supported the prosecution version but in her cross-examination did not support the same. It is submitted further that victim was examined as PW-2 before the trial court, who did not support the prosecution case at all and has been declared hostile. Both the statements have been placed before the court, which are Annexure No. SA-1 to the said supplementary affidavit dated 19.03.2025. It is submitted that victim has exonerated the applicant and has stated he neither committed any rape on her nor did he make any video of her. 2 BAIL No. 30675 of 2024

4. It is submitted that looking to the said fact, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted while placing paragraph no. 14 of the affidavit, the applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 08.07.2024.

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

6. Learned counsel for the first informant submits that although, the first informant has supported the prosecution case in her examination-in-chief, who in her cross-examination has not supported yet, and the victim has not supported the prosecution case in full.

7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties, it is evident that victim is a major girl. The allegation of sexual assault in the F.I.R. is stated to be since last two years but no complaint was made by the victim or her family members earlier.

8. In the trial, the first informant has been examined as PW-1, who although in her examination-in-chief, supports the prosecution case but in her cross- examination does not support it. The victim has been examined as PW-2 before the trial court, who totally disowns the prosecution version and has been declared hostile.

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- Abhishek Kumar, 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 3 BAIL No. 30675 of 2024 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 I.P.C. (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. (Samit Gopal,J.) August 28, 2025 Vibha Singh VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard Sri Skand Bajpayee, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Jayant Rai, learned counsel for the applicant through video conferencing, Mohd. Zafar Yaqub Khan, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Shahroz Khan, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Virendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State, who are present in Court and records have been perused.

2. F.I.R. of the matter which was lodged on 16.06.2024 by Smt. Indravati Devi against the applicant alleging therein that her daughter aged about 19 years was lured and her objectionable photographs were clicked by the applicant. He then on the strength of said photographs established physical relationship with her and was pressing her for marriage. On a complaint, he used to abuse them and threatened them with life. He is continuing the same since the last two years. Previously, due to fear and social reasons, she did not make complaint against him. But now after being annoyed, she is making a complaint.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that first informant has clearly stated in the F.I.R. that victim is a major girl aged about 19 years. It is submitted that relationship with the applicant and victim was continuing since long, but no complaint earlier was made either by the victim or her family members. It is submitted further while placing supplementary affidavit dated 19.03.2025 that the first informant Smt. Indravati Devi was examined as PW-1 before the trial court, who in her examination-in-chief, although supported the prosecution version but in her cross-examination did not support the same. It is submitted further that victim was examined as PW-2 before the trial court, who did not support the prosecution case at all and has been declared hostile. Both the statements have been placed before the court, which are Annexure No. SA-1 to the said supplementary affidavit dated 19.03.2025. It is submitted that victim has exonerated the applicant and has stated he neither committed any rape on her nor did he make any video of her. 2 BAIL No. 30675 of 2024

4. It is submitted that looking to the said fact, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted while placing paragraph no. 14 of the affidavit, the applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 08.07.2024.

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

6. Learned counsel for the first informant submits that although, the first informant has supported the prosecution case in her examination-in-chief, who in her cross-examination has not supported yet, and the victim has not supported the prosecution case in full.

7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties, it is evident that victim is a major girl. The allegation of sexual assault in the F.I.R. is stated to be since last two years but no complaint was made by the victim or her family members earlier.

8. In the trial, the first informant has been examined as PW-1, who although in her examination-in-chief, supports the prosecution case but in her cross- examination does not support it. The victim has been examined as PW-2 before the trial court, who totally disowns the prosecution version and has been declared hostile.

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- Abhishek Kumar, 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 3 BAIL No. 30675 of 2024 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 I.P.C. (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. (Samit Gopal,J.) August 28, 2025 Vibha Singh VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad