✦ High Court of India · 23 Sep 2025

Rahul v. Party

Case Details High Court of India · 23 Sep 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
23 Sep 2025
Bench
SAMIT GOPAL
Length
1,192 words

2. Heard Sri Keshari Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pushpendra Vishvakarma, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

3. Office to trace out the vakalatnama of Sri Pushpendra Vishvakarma which has been filed in the office on 19.09.2025 and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet about it.

4. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Rahul, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 163 of 2025, under Sections 70(2) BNS and Section 5-G/6 POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Nagal, District Saharanpur.

5. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 05.06.2025 by Smt. Sangeeta against Abhai alleging therein that Abhai is the relative of Rahul the resident of same village. On 04.06.2025 at about 08:00 pm her minor daughter aged about 14 years was going to the house of her uncle wherein Abhai called her and then by luring her took her in a room enraged her modesty and then committed rape upon her. She opposed it on which he gagged her mouth with clothes. After sometime when she did not return back she was searched and then her husband after searching reached the place of occurrence and got her released from clutches of Abhai. Her daughter told her about the incident. Report be lodged and action be taken.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR. It is submitted that the victim in her statement 2 BAIL No. 32693 of 2025 under Section 180 BNSS reiterates the version of the FIR. It is submitted that the victim then in her statement under Section 183 BNSS names the applicant and states that co-accused Abhai committed rape upon her after calling her and then the applicant locked the door of the room from outside. It is submitted that thus the role of the applicant in her statement under Section 183 BNSS is of locking the door from outside after which co-accused Abhai committed rape upon her. It is submitted that the victim was examined before the trial court as PW-1 who in her statement in examination-in-chief does name in her cross- examination states although she stated before the Magistrate about the applicant locking the door from outside but she told about it on the saying of the villagers and she did not seen the applicant doing the said act. It is submitted that the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co- accused Abhai. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 27 of the affidavit and is in jail since 14.07.2025. the applicant and

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the first informant although is present but he did not oppose the prayer for bail.

8. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is not named in the FIR, statement of the first informant recorded during investigation and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS. Subsequently his name appears in the statement of the victim under Section 183 BNSS but the role assigned to the applicant is of locking the door of the room from outside after which Abhai is stated to have committed rape upon her. The victim during trial while being examined as PW-1 in her examination-in- chief does not name the applicant and in her cross examination states of disclosing the name of the applicant before the Magistrate on the saying of the villagers but she did not know who locked the door from outside of the room.

9. The case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused Abhai.

10. 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.

11. Let the applicant Rahul, 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. 3 BAIL No. 32693 of 2025 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 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 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) 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 him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against 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.

12. 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.

13. The bail application is allowed.

14. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 23, 2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal,J.) MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Keshari Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pushpendra Vishvakarma, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

3. Office to trace out the vakalatnama of Sri Pushpendra Vishvakarma which has been filed in the office on 19.09.2025 and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet about it.

4. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Rahul, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 163 of 2025, under Sections 70(2) BNS and Section 5-G/6 POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Nagal, District Saharanpur.

5. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 05.06.2025 by Smt. Sangeeta against Abhai alleging therein that Abhai is the relative of Rahul the resident of same village. On 04.06.2025 at about 08:00 pm her minor daughter aged about 14 years was going to the house of her uncle wherein Abhai called her and then by luring her took her in a room enraged her modesty and then committed rape upon her. She opposed it on which he gagged her mouth with clothes. After sometime when she did not return back she was searched and then her husband after searching reached the place of occurrence and got her released from clutches of Abhai. Her daughter told her about the incident. Report be lodged and action be taken.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR. It is submitted that the victim in her statement 2 BAIL No. 32693 of 2025 under Section 180 BNSS reiterates the version of the FIR. It is submitted that the victim then in her statement under Section 183 BNSS names the applicant and states that co-accused Abhai committed rape upon her after calling her and then the applicant locked the door of the room from outside. It is submitted that thus the role of the applicant in her statement under Section 183 BNSS is of locking the door from outside after which co-accused Abhai committed rape upon her. It is submitted that the victim was examined before the trial court as PW-1 who in her statement in examination-in-chief does name in her cross- examination states although she stated before the Magistrate about the applicant locking the door from outside but she told about it on the saying of the villagers and she did not seen the applicant doing the said act. It is submitted that the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co- accused Abhai. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 27 of the affidavit and is in jail since 14.07.2025. the applicant and

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the first informant although is present but he did not oppose the prayer for bail.

8. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is not named in the FIR, statement of the first informant recorded during investigation and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS. Subsequently his name appears in the statement of the victim under Section 183 BNSS but the role assigned to the applicant is of locking the door of the room from outside after which Abhai is stated to have committed rape upon her. The victim during trial while being examined as PW-1 in her examination-in- chief does not name the applicant and in her cross examination states of disclosing the name of the applicant before the Magistrate on the saying of the villagers but she did not know who locked the door from outside of the room.

9. The case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused Abhai.

10. 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.

11. Let the applicant Rahul, 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. 3 BAIL No. 32693 of 2025 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 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 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) 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 him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against 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.

12. 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.

13. The bail application is allowed.

14. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 23, 2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal,J.) MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Find similar cases Start drafting free
This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments