High Court · 2025

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

1. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Akash Keshari with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 6.8.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Varanasi and release the appellant on bail in Case Crime No.168 of 2024 under Sections 376, 377, 313, 308, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3 (1) (dha), 3 (2) (v), 3 (2) (va) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Sarnath, District Varanasi.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the entire record.

3. The prosecution has come forward with a case that the victim of this case had some friendly relations with Akash Keshari, the accused-appellant and gradually they came nearer to each other and physical relations developed between the two. Meanwhile pregnancy occurred to the victim which was terminated by the accused-appellant and he assured to marry with her and on the false pretext of marriage, he continued physical relations with the victim. Subsequently he refused to marry the victim and also abused her by caste related remarks and she was also beaten by the accused-appellant, who also threatened the victim to make some obscene video relating to her viral on social media. F.I.R. was lodged and investigation started.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. The prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. It is also submitted that the victim of this case is a major lady and all the relations made between the two were consensual and the physical relations between them were never made or developed without the consent or free will of the prosecutrix. It is also submitted that there are material contradictions in the statement of the prosecutrix made under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. They had been living in live-in relationship for a period of about 6 years and the prosecutrix visited several places with the appellant without any protest or complaint. The alleged fact of abortion is only a bald allegation. It is also submitted that the appellant never promised or assured to marry with the aggrieved lady and they had been in relationship by mutual consent. It is also submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 28.4.2024. It is further submitted that the bail application of the appellant has been rejected in an illegal manner by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Gorakhpur. It is further submitted that the Court concerned while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the appeal and submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to S.C./S.T. Community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. His bail application is liable to be rejected and the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.

7. This Court takes notice of this fact that now we are living in a changing Society. The moral values and the normal conduct of the young generation in the family, society or at their work place is changing swiftly. So far as the live-in relationship is concerned, it has got no social sanction but since the youth is attracted to such relations because a young person, male or female, can easily escape from his / her liability to his / her partner, their attraction is rapidly increasing in favour of such relations. It is a high time when we all should think over it and try to find out some framework and solution to save the moral values in the society.

8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and also keeping in view that the prosecutrix is a major lady and the consensual relationship made between the two, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.

10. Let the appellant Akash Keshari involved in Case Crime No.168 of 2024 under Sections 376, 377, 313, 308, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3 (1) (dha), 3 (2) (v), 3 (2) (va) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Sarnath, District Varanasi be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 16.1.2025 SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

1. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Akash Keshari with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 6.8.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Varanasi and release the appellant on bail in Case Crime No.168 of 2024 under Sections 376, 377, 313, 308, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3 (1) (dha), 3 (2) (v), 3 (2) (va) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Sarnath, District Varanasi.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the entire record.

3. The prosecution has come forward with a case that the victim of this case had some friendly relations with Akash Keshari, the accused-appellant and gradually they came nearer to each other and physical relations developed between the two. Meanwhile pregnancy occurred to the victim which was terminated by the accused-appellant and he assured to marry with her and on the false pretext of marriage, he continued physical relations with the victim. Subsequently he refused to marry the victim and also abused her by caste related remarks and she was also beaten by the accused-appellant, who also threatened the victim to make some obscene video relating to her viral on social media. F.I.R. was lodged and investigation started.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. The prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. It is also submitted that the victim of this case is a major lady and all the relations made between the two were consensual and the physical relations between them were never made or developed without the consent or free will of the prosecutrix. It is also submitted that there are material contradictions in the statement of the prosecutrix made under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. They had been living in live-in relationship for a period of about 6 years and the prosecutrix visited several places with the appellant without any protest or complaint. The alleged fact of abortion is only a bald allegation. It is also submitted that the appellant never promised or assured to marry with the aggrieved lady and they had been in relationship by mutual consent. It is also submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 28.4.2024. It is further submitted that the bail application of the appellant has been rejected in an illegal manner by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Gorakhpur. It is further submitted that the Court concerned while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the appeal and submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to S.C./S.T. Community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. His bail application is liable to be rejected and the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.

7. This Court takes notice of this fact that now we are living in a changing Society. The moral values and the normal conduct of the young generation in the family, society or at their work place is changing swiftly. So far as the live-in relationship is concerned, it has got no social sanction but since the youth is attracted to such relations because a young person, male or female, can easily escape from his / her liability to his / her partner, their attraction is rapidly increasing in favour of such relations. It is a high time when we all should think over it and try to find out some framework and solution to save the moral values in the society.

8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and also keeping in view that the prosecutrix is a major lady and the consensual relationship made between the two, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.

10. Let the appellant Akash Keshari involved in Case Crime No.168 of 2024 under Sections 376, 377, 313, 308, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3 (1) (dha), 3 (2) (v), 3 (2) (va) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Sarnath, District Varanasi be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 16.1.2025 SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad