Akash Gupta v. Party

Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This second bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Akash Gupta, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 139 of 2024, under Section(s) 376(3) I.P.C., 5J(2)/6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section Scheduled Casters and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, registered at P.S. Lalganj, District Basti.

4. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed for non prosecution by this Court vide order dated 2.7.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34738 of 2024. The said order reads as under:- "1. List revised.

2. No one appears on behalf of the applicants to press this bail application, despite the fact that there are three learned counsels 2 BAIL No. 29045 of 2025 appearing in the matter.

3. Sri Shashi Prakash Misra, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Shashi Kant Pandey, learned counsel for the State are present.

4. The present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Akash Gupta with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.0139 of 2024, under Sections 376(3) I.P.C., 5J(2)/6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act and Section 3(2)5 S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Lalganj, District Basti, during the pendency of trial.

5. There is no representation on behalf of the applicant to press this bail application even in the revised list.

6. Accordingly, the present bail application is dismissed for non prosecution."

5. A Criminal Misc. Recall Application No.5 of 2025 was filed by the applicant which was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated

14.8.2025 by this Court. The said order reads as under:- "1. List revised.

2. Sri Ram Gopal Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashi Prakash Misra, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for State are present.

3. This is a recall application dated 12.07.2025 with the following prayer:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and kindly recall the order dated 02.07.2025 passed by Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. and also restored the present bail application on its original number and status, and or to pass any other and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the case, otherwise the applicant shall suffer 3 BAIL No. 29045 of 2025 an irreparable loss and injury."

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present recall application be dismissed as not pressed as he shall seek appropriate remedy available under law.

5. As prayed, the present recall application is dismissed as not pressed."

6. The F.I.R. of the matter was lodged on 12.6.2024 by Ram Khyal against the applicant alleging therein that he is a labourer. His wife is mentally unsound. He earns his livelihood from the said work. His daughter aged about 13 years was washing utensils in the house wherein Akash Gupta came and forcibly pulled her and committed rape upon her. When his daughter suffered pain in stomach she was taken to the hospital where the doctor advised ultrasound. Ultrasound was done then and from it he came to know that she is having pregnancy of 04-1/2 months. His 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 F.I.R. has been lodged after an unexplained delay of about 5 months. It is submitted that there is no date and time mentioned mentioned in the F.I.R. of the alleged incident. It is further submitted that although the victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. supports the prosecution case but on questions being asked by the Investigating Officer which were being replied by her and one of question was that whether she has informed about this incident to anyone to which she replied in negative. It is submitted that the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. stated that she is aged about 17-18 years and had met the applicant around 2-3 months ago in a marriage and they used to talk to each other and used to like each. They even used to meet each other and physical relation between them was established since long. Subsequently they stopped talking with each other. In the month of April she suffered stomach ache and then in ultrasound it was 4 BAIL No. 29045 of 2025 found that she is having pregnancy of 04-1/2 months. Her father had some discussion with the family members of Akash Gupta with regards to their marriage. It is submitted that as such versions as given by the victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. are not consistent and there are serious contradictions in it. It is further submitted that there is absolutely no evidence to show that offence under S.C./S.T. Act is made out. It is submitted that charge sheet in the matter has been submitted, para-27 of the affidavit has been placed for the same. It is argued that the applicant has no other criminal antecedents as stated in para-32 of the affidavit and is in jail since 15.6.2024.

8. Learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail and has produced before the Court the photocopy of the statement of Ram Khyal/the first informant recorded as P.W.1 before the trial court and also the statement of the victim recorded as P.W.-2, which are taken on record. It is submitted that the victim is a minor girl. Further it is submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and in the statements of the victim and there are allegations against him. The victim was carrying pregnancy of 04- 1/2 months and as such the applicant is involved in the present matter and hence, the prayer for bail be rejected.

9. Learned State counsel opposed the prayer for bail and also adopts the arguments of learned counsel for the first informant.

10. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that this is second bail. The first bail application was dismissed in non prosecution, after which an application for recall was filed which was got dismissed as not pressed. The F.I.R. has been lodged on 12.6.2024 against the applicant but no date and time of the alleged incident is mentioned therein. The F.I.R. has been lodged after inordinate delay of about 5 months as per prosecution version. There is serious contradiction in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. The delay lodging of the F.I.R. totally unexplained. Charge sheet in the matter has been filed against the 5 BAIL No. 29045 of 2025 applicant.

11. 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.

12. Let the applicant- Akash Gupta, 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 6 BAIL No. 29045 of 2025 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.

13. 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.

14. The bail application is allowed.

15. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Samit Gopal,J.) October 9, 2025 Naresh NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This second bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Akash Gupta, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 139 of 2024, under Section(s) 376(3) I.P.C., 5J(2)/6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section Scheduled Casters and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, registered at P.S. Lalganj, District Basti.

4. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed for non prosecution by this Court vide order dated 2.7.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34738 of 2024. The said order reads as under:- "1. List revised.

2. No one appears on behalf of the applicants to press this bail application, despite the fact that there are three learned counsels 2 BAIL No. 29045 of 2025 appearing in the matter.

3. Sri Shashi Prakash Misra, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Shashi Kant Pandey, learned counsel for the State are present.

4. The present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Akash Gupta with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.0139 of 2024, under Sections 376(3) I.P.C., 5J(2)/6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act and Section 3(2)5 S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Lalganj, District Basti, during the pendency of trial.

5. There is no representation on behalf of the applicant to press this bail application even in the revised list.

6. Accordingly, the present bail application is dismissed for non prosecution."

5. A Criminal Misc. Recall Application No.5 of 2025 was filed by the applicant which was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated

14.8.2025 by this Court. The said order reads as under:- "1. List revised.

2. Sri Ram Gopal Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashi Prakash Misra, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for State are present.

3. This is a recall application dated 12.07.2025 with the following prayer:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and kindly recall the order dated 02.07.2025 passed by Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. and also restored the present bail application on its original number and status, and or to pass any other and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the case, otherwise the applicant shall suffer 3 BAIL No. 29045 of 2025 an irreparable loss and injury."

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present recall application be dismissed as not pressed as he shall seek appropriate remedy available under law.

5. As prayed, the present recall application is dismissed as not pressed."

6. The F.I.R. of the matter was lodged on 12.6.2024 by Ram Khyal against the applicant alleging therein that he is a labourer. His wife is mentally unsound. He earns his livelihood from the said work. His daughter aged about 13 years was washing utensils in the house wherein Akash Gupta came and forcibly pulled her and committed rape upon her. When his daughter suffered pain in stomach she was taken to the hospital where the doctor advised ultrasound. Ultrasound was done then and from it he came to know that she is having pregnancy of 04-1/2 months. His 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 F.I.R. has been lodged after an unexplained delay of about 5 months. It is submitted that there is no date and time mentioned mentioned in the F.I.R. of the alleged incident. It is further submitted that although the victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. supports the prosecution case but on questions being asked by the Investigating Officer which were being replied by her and one of question was that whether she has informed about this incident to anyone to which she replied in negative. It is submitted that the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. stated that she is aged about 17-18 years and had met the applicant around 2-3 months ago in a marriage and they used to talk to each other and used to like each. They even used to meet each other and physical relation between them was established since long. Subsequently they stopped talking with each other. In the month of April she suffered stomach ache and then in ultrasound it was 4 BAIL No. 29045 of 2025 found that she is having pregnancy of 04-1/2 months. Her father had some discussion with the family members of Akash Gupta with regards to their marriage. It is submitted that as such versions as given by the victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. are not consistent and there are serious contradictions in it. It is further submitted that there is absolutely no evidence to show that offence under S.C./S.T. Act is made out. It is submitted that charge sheet in the matter has been submitted, para-27 of the affidavit has been placed for the same. It is argued that the applicant has no other criminal antecedents as stated in para-32 of the affidavit and is in jail since 15.6.2024.

8. Learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail and has produced before the Court the photocopy of the statement of Ram Khyal/the first informant recorded as P.W.1 before the trial court and also the statement of the victim recorded as P.W.-2, which are taken on record. It is submitted that the victim is a minor girl. Further it is submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and in the statements of the victim and there are allegations against him. The victim was carrying pregnancy of 04- 1/2 months and as such the applicant is involved in the present matter and hence, the prayer for bail be rejected.

9. Learned State counsel opposed the prayer for bail and also adopts the arguments of learned counsel for the first informant.

10. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that this is second bail. The first bail application was dismissed in non prosecution, after which an application for recall was filed which was got dismissed as not pressed. The F.I.R. has been lodged on 12.6.2024 against the applicant but no date and time of the alleged incident is mentioned therein. The F.I.R. has been lodged after inordinate delay of about 5 months as per prosecution version. There is serious contradiction in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. The delay lodging of the F.I.R. totally unexplained. Charge sheet in the matter has been filed against the 5 BAIL No. 29045 of 2025 applicant.

11. 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.

12. Let the applicant- Akash Gupta, 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 6 BAIL No. 29045 of 2025 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.

13. 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.

14. The bail application is allowed.

15. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Samit Gopal,J.) October 9, 2025 Naresh NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad