Ijhar Khan v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And

Order

- "As per office report dated 28.05.2025, which is based upon the letter of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Unnao dated 23.05.2025 the service upon the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 is sufficient. However, when the case is taken up, no one appeared on behalf of the private opposite party Nos.2 and 3 to oppose the appeal. However, learned A.G.A. is present for the State.

In view of the above, the case is adjourned today. List this case in the 11.09.2025, in terms of earlier order. It is made clear that on the next dates fixed in the case, the case would not be adjourned in the absence of the opposite party No.2 and the matter would be heard and decided on merits and appropriate orders would be passed in the case in first call."

2. Today also when the case is called out, on one appeared on behalf of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3. However, learned A.G.A. for the State is present. In these circumstances, the court proceeded to decided the matter finally.

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

4. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the order dated 21.03.2025, passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No.738 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No.33 of 2025, under Sections 2 CRLA No. 1421 of 2025 - 64(1), 76, 333, 115(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Asiwan, District - Unnao.

5. While pressing the instant appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant, aged about 67 years and having no criminal history, which has not been refuted by learned A.G.A., is in jail since 19.02.2025 and he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by the opposite party No.2 by lodging the F.I.R. making allegations therein to attract the offence under Sections 64(1), 76, 333, 115(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3 (2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, according to which the appellant who is senior citizen aged about 67 years was trying to outrage the modesty of the daughter of the opposite party No.2/victim, aged about 19 years.

6. It is further submitted that the allegations leveled by the opposite party No.2, subsequently in different way, have been supported by the victim just to get the pecuniary benefit from the State Exchequer.

7. It is also stated that a perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 and 183 of the BNSS would indicate that the victim during investigation leveled allegations against the appellant according to which the appellant has committed rape with her but this fact is not supported by the medical evidence as bare perusal of the medical examination report would indicate that the doctor concerned found no injury (internal or external) on the body of the victim. The ultrasound report also does not support the story of the prosecution. In these circumstances, the appellant is also entitled to be released on bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

8. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel.

9. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents.

10. Upon due consideration of above facts and keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

11. Order dated 21.03.2025, passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No.738 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No.33 of 2025, under Sections - 64(1), 76, 333, 115(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Asiwan, District - Unnao is hereby set aside.

12. Let the appellant - Kallu @ Ijhar Khan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal a bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to 3 CRLA No. 1421 of 2025 following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

13. In case of default of above conditions it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

14. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. November 6, 2025 ML/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

In view of the above, the case is adjourned today. List this case in the 11.09.2025, in terms of earlier order. It is made clear that on the next dates fixed in the case, the case would not be adjourned in the absence of the opposite party No.2 and the matter would be heard and decided on merits and appropriate orders would be passed in the case in first call."

2. Today also when the case is called out, on one appeared on behalf of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3. However, learned A.G.A. for the State is present. In these circumstances, the court proceeded to decided the matter finally.

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

4. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the order dated 21.03.2025, passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No.738 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No.33 of 2025, under Sections 2 CRLA No. 1421 of 2025 - 64(1), 76, 333, 115(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Asiwan, District - Unnao.

5. While pressing the instant appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant, aged about 67 years and having no criminal history, which has not been refuted by learned A.G.A., is in jail since 19.02.2025 and he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by the opposite party No.2 by lodging the F.I.R. making allegations therein to attract the offence under Sections 64(1), 76, 333, 115(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3 (2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, according to which the appellant who is senior citizen aged about 67 years was trying to outrage the modesty of the daughter of the opposite party No.2/victim, aged about 19 years.

6. It is further submitted that the allegations leveled by the opposite party No.2, subsequently in different way, have been supported by the victim just to get the pecuniary benefit from the State Exchequer.

7. It is also stated that a perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 and 183 of the BNSS would indicate that the victim during investigation leveled allegations against the appellant according to which the appellant has committed rape with her but this fact is not supported by the medical evidence as bare perusal of the medical examination report would indicate that the doctor concerned found no injury (internal or external) on the body of the victim. The ultrasound report also does not support the story of the prosecution. In these circumstances, the appellant is also entitled to be released on bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

8. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel.

9. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents.

10. Upon due consideration of above facts and keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

11. Order dated 21.03.2025, passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No.738 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No.33 of 2025, under Sections - 64(1), 76, 333, 115(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Asiwan, District - Unnao is hereby set aside.

12. Let the appellant - Kallu @ Ijhar Khan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal a bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to 3 CRLA No. 1421 of 2025 following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

13. In case of default of above conditions it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

14. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. November 6, 2025 ML/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench