Allahabad High Court
Case Details
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28963 of 2025 Aavir Ali @ Aavid Ali State Of U.P. And 3 Others Versus .....Applicant(s) .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Dinesh Kumar Pandey, Manu Sharma : Chandra Prakash Singh, G.A. Court No. - 64 1. List revised. HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard Sri Manu Sharma and Sri Dinesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Chandra Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the first informant/opp. party no.4, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant-Aavir Ali alias Aavid Ali, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.140 of 2025, u/s 70(2), 74, 137(2), 127(2), 351(3) of BNS and Sections 7/8 and 5G/6 POCSO Act, and Section 67 of Information Technology Act, P.S. Sinduriya, District Maharajganj. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 28.6.2025 by Anil Kumar against the applicant, Seraj and two other unknown persons alleging therein that on 26.6.2025 at about 6 p.m., his daughter aged about 14 years was returning from the field after sowing the crops wherein at a lonely place, the accused persons caught-hold of her and enraged her modesty and threw her on the ground. On her making a shout, the people of the village reached there and then the accused persons ran away. The entire incident is recorded in a video which has been posted on social media. A report be lodged and action be taken. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further argued that the case as per 2 BAIL No. 28963 of 2025 the FIR and the prosecution at the very inception was of outraging modesty of the victim by two named accused including the applicant and two unknown persons on 26.6.2025 at about 6 p.m. It is further argued that the first informant reiterates the version of the FIR during investigation but in his statement further states that the accused persons had stopped his daughter on 26.6.2025 and asked for some sexual favour which was denied by her. The incident was told by his daughter to his wife on 27.6.2025. The first informant then in his statement adds that on 25.6.2025, the accused persons caught-hold of his daughter near a brick-kiln and co-accused Sukurrullah and Riyaz Ali caught-hold of her whereas Aavid Ali (the applicant) and Seraz committed rape upon her, the same is an improvement in the present case and afterthought. It is further argued that the mother of the victim also reiterates the same version as given by the first informant during investigation. It is further argued that the victim during investigation states of rape being committed on her on 25.6.2025 but does not state of any further act on different dates on her. It is further argued that a video of 25.6.2025 of 8.46 p.m. and 8.47 p.m. has been given to the Investigating Officer who in the case diary has made a note that on viewing the same it transpires that the accused persons were having scuffle with the victim and were enraging her modesty. Although as per the school records, the date of birth of the victim has been mentioned as 5.1.2011 but the C.M.O concerned has opined her age about 18 years. It is further argued that during investigation, Ranjeet Yadav was interrogated who states that one video was sent to him by Seraj Ahmad which he has deleted and as such there is no other video collected during investigation, thus the prosecution story is not consistent. It is further argued that the victim during her medical examination was not found to have received any injury either externally or internally. It is further argued that the victim has stated of the applicant and co-accused Seraj Ahmad committing rape upon her but the said fact is missing in the FIR. It is further argued that FIR has been lodged after an unexplained delay of about two days. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 33 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 29.6.2025. 6. Per contra learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 3 BAIL No. 28963 of 2025 7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the prosecution story is not consistent. The FIR has been lodged after unexplained delay of two days. Factum of rape on the victim is missing in the FIR which has subsequently been stated during investigation. The victim was not found to have received any injury either on her body or on her private parts. 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-Aavir Ali alias Aavid Ali, 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 she/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 her/him presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 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 her/him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 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) 4 BAIL No. 28963 of 2025 recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 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 her/him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her/him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (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.
Decision
12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 11, 2025 Gaurav Kuls (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad