High Court · 2025

1.Heard Mr. Mohd Irfan Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Hari Shanker Maurya, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Mr. Faiz Mohammad, learned counsel, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant/ prosecutrix, opposite party No.2 along with counter affidavit, the same is taken on record.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit, today in the Court, the same is taken on record.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards the bail rejection order dated 26.11.2024 passed by the learned trial court wherein Section 70 (2) B.N.S. has been indicated but in the present bail application that section has not been indicated. Therefore, in the supplementary affidavit, learned counsel for the applicant has requested that the aforesaid section may also be indicated in the present case.

4. Though the applicant should have been filed amendment application but the aforesaid section has been indicated in the bail rejection order dated 26.11.2024, therefore, in the interest of justice, Section 70(2) B.N.S. may be indicated in the present case.

5. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Gaurav Singh @ Gaurav) is languishing in jail since 10.10.2024 in Case Crime No.0531 of 2024, under Sections 70 (2), 69, 89, 123, 351 (3) 303 (2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short B.N.S.) and Section 5/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, (in short POCSO) and Sections 3 (2) (V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Sushant Golf City, District- Lucknow.

6. 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.

7. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) which was lodged on 07.10.2024 for the alleged incident dated 30.08.2024 without explaining the delay. In the F.I.R., neither the allegation has been levelled against the present applicant nor he has been implicated in the array of accused persons inasmuch as the allegation has been levelled against three accused persons, namely, Nikhil Yadav @ Raja, Nitin brother of Nikhil Yadav and Vipin Pal and one unknown person.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that today the counter affidavit on behalf of the prosecutrix has been filed wherein she has categorically indicated that she has not levelled any allegation against the present applicant. In the present case the present applicant is neither named in the F.I.R. nor any allegation has been levelled against him. In the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. his name has not been indicated whereas in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. she has stated that one friend of Nikhil Yadav has committed rape with her.

9. Learned counsel for the prosecutrix has informed on the basis of specific instructions that the prosecutrix has not levelled any allegation against the present applicant. Mainly, the allegations have been levelled against three named accused persons who are the real culprits.

10. Learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned counsel for the prosecutrix have stated that the prosecutrix is having infant child and father of that child is accused No.1, Nikhil Yadav @ Raja. The report of D.N.A. has not come. However, in any case, the present applicant has nothing to do with the aforesaid incident and the offence in question. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The charge-sheet has been filed. 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 in the trial proceedings properly.

11. 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

12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that there is an inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R.; the prosecutrix has not levelled any allegation against the present applicant; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; the charge-sheet has been filed 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 in 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.

13. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

14. Let the applicant (Gaurav Singh @ Gaurav) 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 :- 24.2.2025 Suresh/ [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1.Heard Mr. Mohd Irfan Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Hari Shanker Maurya, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Mr. Faiz Mohammad, learned counsel, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant/ prosecutrix, opposite party No.2 along with counter affidavit, the same is taken on record.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit, today in the Court, the same is taken on record.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards the bail rejection order dated 26.11.2024 passed by the learned trial court wherein Section 70 (2) B.N.S. has been indicated but in the present bail application that section has not been indicated. Therefore, in the supplementary affidavit, learned counsel for the applicant has requested that the aforesaid section may also be indicated in the present case.

4. Though the applicant should have been filed amendment application but the aforesaid section has been indicated in the bail rejection order dated 26.11.2024, therefore, in the interest of justice, Section 70(2) B.N.S. may be indicated in the present case.

5. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Gaurav Singh @ Gaurav) is languishing in jail since 10.10.2024 in Case Crime No.0531 of 2024, under Sections 70 (2), 69, 89, 123, 351 (3) 303 (2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short B.N.S.) and Section 5/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, (in short POCSO) and Sections 3 (2) (V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Sushant Golf City, District- Lucknow.

6. 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.

7. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) which was lodged on 07.10.2024 for the alleged incident dated 30.08.2024 without explaining the delay. In the F.I.R., neither the allegation has been levelled against the present applicant nor he has been implicated in the array of accused persons inasmuch as the allegation has been levelled against three accused persons, namely, Nikhil Yadav @ Raja, Nitin brother of Nikhil Yadav and Vipin Pal and one unknown person.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that today the counter affidavit on behalf of the prosecutrix has been filed wherein she has categorically indicated that she has not levelled any allegation against the present applicant. In the present case the present applicant is neither named in the F.I.R. nor any allegation has been levelled against him. In the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. his name has not been indicated whereas in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. she has stated that one friend of Nikhil Yadav has committed rape with her.

9. Learned counsel for the prosecutrix has informed on the basis of specific instructions that the prosecutrix has not levelled any allegation against the present applicant. Mainly, the allegations have been levelled against three named accused persons who are the real culprits.

10. Learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned counsel for the prosecutrix have stated that the prosecutrix is having infant child and father of that child is accused No.1, Nikhil Yadav @ Raja. The report of D.N.A. has not come. However, in any case, the present applicant has nothing to do with the aforesaid incident and the offence in question. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The charge-sheet has been filed. 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 in the trial proceedings properly.

11. 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

12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that there is an inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R.; the prosecutrix has not levelled any allegation against the present applicant; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; the charge-sheet has been filed 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 in 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.

13. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

14. Let the applicant (Gaurav Singh @ Gaurav) 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 :- 24.2.2025 Suresh/ [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench