High Court · 2025

1. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Ms. Ifra Islam, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material available on record.

2. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 388 of 2024, under Sections 376(2)(N), 504, 506, 120B of I.P.C., Police Station - Pipraich, District - Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY:

3. The applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage and subsequently is stated to have refused to comply with the said promise.

4. The applicant was granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 12.12.2024 and the following order was passed : "1. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.388 of 2024, under Sections 376(2) (N), 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Pipraich, District- Gorakhpur, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. The FIR was lodged by the victim herself against the applicant and other co-accused persons with the allegation that the applicant used to come at the house of informant's friend and also used to rape with her on the pretext of marriage from last one year but now he is refused to solemnized marriage with her. It is further alleged in the FIR that there is a cooperation of her friend as well as family members of her friend.

4. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that applicant is in judicial custody since 21.07.2024. It is next submitted that as per the Medical Examination Report, the victim is aged about 19 years and she is major and the applicant is still ready to perform marriage with her. It is further submitted that applicant may be granted concession of interim bail in order to enable him to perform marriage with the victim.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the applicant- Vikram, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on interim bail on his 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 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC. (iii) 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 IPC. (iv) 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. (v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

6. List this case on 20.01.2025 as fresh. The applicant shall perform marriage with the victim, if she is ready, as volunteered by him, on or before 20.01.2025 and shall get the marriage registered.

7. It is made clear that in case the applicant fails to perform marriage with the victim within the time stipulated, the interim bail shall be cancelled on the next date of hearing.

8. On next day, the applicant and victim are directed to appear before this Court in person. " ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT:

5. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR.

6. In compliance of the order of this Court dated 12.12.2024, the applicant contacted the victim and her family members but they have plainly refused to marry the victim to the applicant.

7. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length.

8. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.07.2024, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE BY STATE LAW OFFICER:

9. The bail application has been opposed but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. CONCLUSION:

10. The well-known principle of "Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty," gives rise to the concept of bail as a rule and imprisonment as an exception.

11. A person's right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because the person is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no one's life or personal liberty may be taken away unless the procedure established by law is followed, and the procedure must be just and reasonable. The said principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690.

12. Reiterating the aforesaid view, the Supreme Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595, has again emphasized that the very well-settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment is not to be forgotten. It is high time that the Courts should recognize the principle that "bail is a rule and jail is an exception".

13. Learned State Law Officer could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.

14. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned State Law Officer.

15. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment. The order dated 12.12.2024 has been complied by the applicant but there is no possibility of the said marriage being solemnized in near future. Under the circumstances, order dated 12.12.2024 is made absolute. At this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

16. Let the applicant- Vikram, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his 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 applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) 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.

17. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

18. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Priya (Justice Krishan Pahal) PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Ms. Ifra Islam, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material available on record.

2. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 388 of 2024, under Sections 376(2)(N), 504, 506, 120B of I.P.C., Police Station - Pipraich, District - Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY:

3. The applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage and subsequently is stated to have refused to comply with the said promise.

4. The applicant was granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 12.12.2024 and the following order was passed : "1. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.388 of 2024, under Sections 376(2) (N), 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Pipraich, District- Gorakhpur, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. The FIR was lodged by the victim herself against the applicant and other co-accused persons with the allegation that the applicant used to come at the house of informant's friend and also used to rape with her on the pretext of marriage from last one year but now he is refused to solemnized marriage with her. It is further alleged in the FIR that there is a cooperation of her friend as well as family members of her friend.

4. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that applicant is in judicial custody since 21.07.2024. It is next submitted that as per the Medical Examination Report, the victim is aged about 19 years and she is major and the applicant is still ready to perform marriage with her. It is further submitted that applicant may be granted concession of interim bail in order to enable him to perform marriage with the victim.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the applicant- Vikram, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on interim bail on his 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 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC. (iii) 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 IPC. (iv) 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. (v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

6. List this case on 20.01.2025 as fresh. The applicant shall perform marriage with the victim, if she is ready, as volunteered by him, on or before 20.01.2025 and shall get the marriage registered.

7. It is made clear that in case the applicant fails to perform marriage with the victim within the time stipulated, the interim bail shall be cancelled on the next date of hearing.

8. On next day, the applicant and victim are directed to appear before this Court in person. " ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT:

5. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR.

6. In compliance of the order of this Court dated 12.12.2024, the applicant contacted the victim and her family members but they have plainly refused to marry the victim to the applicant.

7. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length.

8. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.07.2024, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE BY STATE LAW OFFICER:

9. The bail application has been opposed but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. CONCLUSION:

10. The well-known principle of "Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty," gives rise to the concept of bail as a rule and imprisonment as an exception.

11. A person's right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because the person is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no one's life or personal liberty may be taken away unless the procedure established by law is followed, and the procedure must be just and reasonable. The said principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690.

12. Reiterating the aforesaid view, the Supreme Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595, has again emphasized that the very well-settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment is not to be forgotten. It is high time that the Courts should recognize the principle that "bail is a rule and jail is an exception".

13. Learned State Law Officer could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.

14. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned State Law Officer.

15. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment. The order dated 12.12.2024 has been complied by the applicant but there is no possibility of the said marriage being solemnized in near future. Under the circumstances, order dated 12.12.2024 is made absolute. At this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

16. Let the applicant- Vikram, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his 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 applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) 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.

17. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

18. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Priya (Justice Krishan Pahal) PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad