High Court · 2025

Applicant :- Vipin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shafaq Fatima,Gaurav Srivastava,Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

1. Heard Ms. Shafaq Fatima, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Rishikesh Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Despite the service of notice upon the opposite party no.2, no one has appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2 nor any request for adjournment has been made.

3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the present applicant is languishing in jail since 06.08.2024 in Case Crime No.149 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of IPC and Section 5J(II)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Police Station Ajgain, District Unnao.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR, wherein the date of incident has been indicated as 30.04.2024 but the FIR has been lodged on 16.05.2024, without explaining the aforesaid inordinate delay of 16 days in the impugned FIR, the allegation has been levelled against four accused persons including the present applicant. During the course of investigation, no incriminating material or evidence has been found against the other accused persons so the chargesheet has been filed only against the present applicant.

5. Learned counsel has stated that since prosecution story is based on concocted facts, therefore, no allegation against the other co-accused persons have been established. As a matter of fact, the present applicant was in affairs with the prosecutrix and he was under impression that she is a major lady so he got married with her and for that wedlock she got pregnant but the mother of the prosecutrix was not agreeable for the marriage, therefore, false and misconceived FIR has been lodged against the present applicant and the pregnancy of the prosecutrix got aborted.

6. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure No.5, which is a notarized affidavit of the prosecutrix, wherein she has stated that the impugned FIR is false and misconceived as she had gone with the present applicant by her consent and got married with him. At the time of marriage, she was 18 years and 6 months. From the aforesaid wedlock, she became pregnant but her mother got her fetus aborted.

7. Learned counsel has stated that presently the prosecutrix is living with her mother but as soon as the applicant releases from jail, he will bring the prosecutrix with him and shall start living with her as husband and wife. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Chargesheet has been filed in this case and she undertakes on behalf of the present applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if so granted.

8. On the other hand, Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant and submits that he is not entitled for grant of bail but could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

9. Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that the fact that the alleged incident took place on 30.04.2024 but the F.I.R. to this effect has been lodged on 16.05.2024 without explaining the inordinate delay; During the course of investigation, no incriminating material or evidence has been found against the other accused persons so the chargesheet has been filed only against the present applicant; the prosecution story is based on concocted facts, therefore, no allegation against the other co- accused persons have been established; the impugned FIR is false and misconceived as she had gone with the present applicant by her consent and got married with him; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; chargesheet has been filed and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly, I am of the view that the applicant may be released on bail in this case.

10. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant- Vipin, involved in aforesaid 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 with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (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./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the 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/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S., 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. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. Order Date :- 14.7.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

Applicant :- Vipin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shafaq Fatima,Gaurav Srivastava,Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

1. Heard Ms. Shafaq Fatima, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Rishikesh Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Despite the service of notice upon the opposite party no.2, no one has appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2 nor any request for adjournment has been made.

3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the present applicant is languishing in jail since 06.08.2024 in Case Crime No.149 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of IPC and Section 5J(II)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Police Station Ajgain, District Unnao.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR, wherein the date of incident has been indicated as 30.04.2024 but the FIR has been lodged on 16.05.2024, without explaining the aforesaid inordinate delay of 16 days in the impugned FIR, the allegation has been levelled against four accused persons including the present applicant. During the course of investigation, no incriminating material or evidence has been found against the other accused persons so the chargesheet has been filed only against the present applicant.

5. Learned counsel has stated that since prosecution story is based on concocted facts, therefore, no allegation against the other co-accused persons have been established. As a matter of fact, the present applicant was in affairs with the prosecutrix and he was under impression that she is a major lady so he got married with her and for that wedlock she got pregnant but the mother of the prosecutrix was not agreeable for the marriage, therefore, false and misconceived FIR has been lodged against the present applicant and the pregnancy of the prosecutrix got aborted.

6. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure No.5, which is a notarized affidavit of the prosecutrix, wherein she has stated that the impugned FIR is false and misconceived as she had gone with the present applicant by her consent and got married with him. At the time of marriage, she was 18 years and 6 months. From the aforesaid wedlock, she became pregnant but her mother got her fetus aborted.

7. Learned counsel has stated that presently the prosecutrix is living with her mother but as soon as the applicant releases from jail, he will bring the prosecutrix with him and shall start living with her as husband and wife. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Chargesheet has been filed in this case and she undertakes on behalf of the present applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if so granted.

8. On the other hand, Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant and submits that he is not entitled for grant of bail but could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

9. Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that the fact that the alleged incident took place on 30.04.2024 but the F.I.R. to this effect has been lodged on 16.05.2024 without explaining the inordinate delay; During the course of investigation, no incriminating material or evidence has been found against the other accused persons so the chargesheet has been filed only against the present applicant; the prosecution story is based on concocted facts, therefore, no allegation against the other co- accused persons have been established; the impugned FIR is false and misconceived as she had gone with the present applicant by her consent and got married with him; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; chargesheet has been filed and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly, I am of the view that the applicant may be released on bail in this case.

10. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant- Vipin, involved in aforesaid 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 with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (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./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the 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/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S., 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. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. Order Date :- 14.7.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench