High Court · 2025

1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Akela, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ran Vijai Singh, learned AGA for the State.

2. This is the second bail application as first bail application has been rejected being not pressed with liberty to file afresh vide order dated 16.12.2024 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12945 of 2024.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 05.11.2024 in Case Crime No.699 of 2024, under Sections 69, 351 (3) of B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, 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 drown towards the impugned FIR wherein the sole allegation has been levelled against the present applicant to the effect that he established physical relation with the prosecutrix on the pretext of false promise of marriage. In her statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS, the prosecutrix has herself stated that she was having cordial relation with the applicant for the last four years, their marriage was settled and on account of that fact, the applicant established physical relation with her couple of times. However, her father died on 12.11.2023, then the applicant demanded dowry of Rupees five lakh and when the family members of the prosecutrix stated that they are not able to pay the dowry, the applicant refused to get married.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the aforesaid prosecution story is false and misconceived inasmuch as the present applicant was interested for marriage but the prosecutrix was in relation with another man and she was only blackmailing the present applicant. Annexure No.5 of the bail application is WhatsApp chat between the prosecutrix and sister of the present applicant wherein the prosecutrix herself demanded a sum of Rupees ten lakh threatening her that if the aforesaid amount is not paid, she will lodge false case of rape. The mother of the applicant lodged a complaint on Jan Sunvai Portal before the competent authority on 10.09.2024 and also filed a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Unnao on 11.09.2024 collectively indicating the aforesaid fact but the prosecution did not verify the aforesaid fact before filing the charge sheet. Even the aforesaid fact was placed before the District Judge at the time of argument of bail application but no heed was paid by the prosecution to verify the aforesaid fact. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Charge sheet has been filed. Further, the applicant undertakes that if he is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings.

6. Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

7. Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR; the fact that this is a case of establishing physical relation on the pretext of false promise of marriage; Annexure No.5 of the bail application is WhatsApp chat between the prosecutrix and sister of the present applicant wherein the prosecutrix herself is alleged to have demanded a sum of Rupees ten lakh threatening her that if the aforesaid amount is not paid, she will lodge false case of rape; mother of the applicant lodged a complaint on Jan Sunvai Portal before the competent authority on 10.09.2024 and also filed a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Unnao on 11.09.2024 indicating the aforesaid fact but the prosecution did not verify the aforesaid fact before filing the charge sheet; even the aforesaid fact was placed before the District Judge at the time of argument of bail application but no heed was paid by the prosecution to verify the aforesaid fact; the applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

9. Let applicant- Abhishek Jaiswal be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:- (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 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 84 of the 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 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 351 of the 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. (v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. Order Date :- 24.1.2025 RBS/- [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Akela, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ran Vijai Singh, learned AGA for the State.

2. This is the second bail application as first bail application has been rejected being not pressed with liberty to file afresh vide order dated 16.12.2024 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12945 of 2024.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 05.11.2024 in Case Crime No.699 of 2024, under Sections 69, 351 (3) of B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, 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 drown towards the impugned FIR wherein the sole allegation has been levelled against the present applicant to the effect that he established physical relation with the prosecutrix on the pretext of false promise of marriage. In her statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS, the prosecutrix has herself stated that she was having cordial relation with the applicant for the last four years, their marriage was settled and on account of that fact, the applicant established physical relation with her couple of times. However, her father died on 12.11.2023, then the applicant demanded dowry of Rupees five lakh and when the family members of the prosecutrix stated that they are not able to pay the dowry, the applicant refused to get married.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the aforesaid prosecution story is false and misconceived inasmuch as the present applicant was interested for marriage but the prosecutrix was in relation with another man and she was only blackmailing the present applicant. Annexure No.5 of the bail application is WhatsApp chat between the prosecutrix and sister of the present applicant wherein the prosecutrix herself demanded a sum of Rupees ten lakh threatening her that if the aforesaid amount is not paid, she will lodge false case of rape. The mother of the applicant lodged a complaint on Jan Sunvai Portal before the competent authority on 10.09.2024 and also filed a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Unnao on 11.09.2024 collectively indicating the aforesaid fact but the prosecution did not verify the aforesaid fact before filing the charge sheet. Even the aforesaid fact was placed before the District Judge at the time of argument of bail application but no heed was paid by the prosecution to verify the aforesaid fact. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Charge sheet has been filed. Further, the applicant undertakes that if he is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings.

6. Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

7. Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR; the fact that this is a case of establishing physical relation on the pretext of false promise of marriage; Annexure No.5 of the bail application is WhatsApp chat between the prosecutrix and sister of the present applicant wherein the prosecutrix herself is alleged to have demanded a sum of Rupees ten lakh threatening her that if the aforesaid amount is not paid, she will lodge false case of rape; mother of the applicant lodged a complaint on Jan Sunvai Portal before the competent authority on 10.09.2024 and also filed a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Unnao on 11.09.2024 indicating the aforesaid fact but the prosecution did not verify the aforesaid fact before filing the charge sheet; even the aforesaid fact was placed before the District Judge at the time of argument of bail application but no heed was paid by the prosecution to verify the aforesaid fact; the applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

9. Let applicant- Abhishek Jaiswal be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:- (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 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 84 of the 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 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 351 of the 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. (v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. Order Date :- 24.1.2025 RBS/- [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench