High Court · 2025

1.Heard Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. Surendra Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. However, no one has appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.4 though proper information of mentioning the case has been given by Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant to the learned counsel for the informant as receipt to that effect dated 07.07.2025 has been shown and the same is taken on record.

3. Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh has stated that on earlier occasion the counsel for the informant was not present without explaining the reason.

4. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Harendra @ Chhote) is languishing in jail since 18.07.2024 in Case Crime No.0316 of 2024, under Sections 376, 504 & 506 I.P.C. and Section 4 (2) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station-Beniganj, District-Hardoi.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

6. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) wherein the specific allegation of rape has been levelled against younger brother (Dewari Lal Maurya) of the present applicant. However, the other allegations have been levelled against the father of the present applicant. No allegations of any kind whatsoever have been levelled against the present applicant as he is not named person of the F.I.R. While recording the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 Cr.P.C., no allegations of any kind whatsoever have been levelled against the present applicant. However, while recording the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. after about one month the allegation has been levelled against the present applicant that he also involved in committing the offence of rape. The prosecutrix could not explain the reason while recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as to why she has not levelled allegation against the present applicant in the F.I.R. or in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The charge-sheet has been filed in this case. He has undertaken on behalf of the present applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court, and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly.

8. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid factual contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that there is contradiction in the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.; the present applicant is not named in the F.I.R. nor any allegation of rape has been levelled against the present applicant; rather, the allegation of rape has been levelled against the younger brother (Dewari Lal Maurya) of the present applicant; the charge-sheet has been filed and the present applicant is having no prior criminal history and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant (Harendra @ Chhote) 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 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 :- 7.7.2025 Suresh/ [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1.Heard Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. Surendra Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. However, no one has appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.4 though proper information of mentioning the case has been given by Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant to the learned counsel for the informant as receipt to that effect dated 07.07.2025 has been shown and the same is taken on record.

3. Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh has stated that on earlier occasion the counsel for the informant was not present without explaining the reason.

4. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Harendra @ Chhote) is languishing in jail since 18.07.2024 in Case Crime No.0316 of 2024, under Sections 376, 504 & 506 I.P.C. and Section 4 (2) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station-Beniganj, District-Hardoi.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

6. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) wherein the specific allegation of rape has been levelled against younger brother (Dewari Lal Maurya) of the present applicant. However, the other allegations have been levelled against the father of the present applicant. No allegations of any kind whatsoever have been levelled against the present applicant as he is not named person of the F.I.R. While recording the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 Cr.P.C., no allegations of any kind whatsoever have been levelled against the present applicant. However, while recording the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. after about one month the allegation has been levelled against the present applicant that he also involved in committing the offence of rape. The prosecutrix could not explain the reason while recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as to why she has not levelled allegation against the present applicant in the F.I.R. or in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The charge-sheet has been filed in this case. He has undertaken on behalf of the present applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court, and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly.

8. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid factual contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that there is contradiction in the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.; the present applicant is not named in the F.I.R. nor any allegation of rape has been levelled against the present applicant; rather, the allegation of rape has been levelled against the younger brother (Dewari Lal Maurya) of the present applicant; the charge-sheet has been filed and the present applicant is having no prior criminal history and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant (Harendra @ Chhote) 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 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 :- 7.7.2025 Suresh/ [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench