High Court · 2025

2. In the aforesaid background of the case, the Court with the assistance of Ms. Anjali Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Satyendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State, proceeded to hear the appeal on merits.

3. By means of instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 19.05.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Sultanpur, in Bail Application No.1210 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 40 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 74, 324(4), 109, 64 BNS and Section 3(2) (5), 3(1) w & 3(1)DA, DHA of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Bazar Shukul, District-Amethi.

4. It is stated that if the case of prosecution, with regard to relationship between the victim and appellant, is taken on its face value, then in that eventuality, it can be inferred that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case.

5. Further stated that victim, aged about 20 years, was in touch rather in the love affair with the appellant, aged about 25 years, however, this relationship was not formally recognized by the family members of the victim and therefore, the FIR, in connection with appellant is in jail, has been lodged by the victim under the pressure of her family members on 25.02.2025 at P.S.-Bazar Shukul, District-Amethi, registered as Case Crime No. 40 of 2025. As per this FIR, the appellant assaulted the victim and also tried to outrage her modesty and thereafter the victim strangled and drowned in the river by the appellant, however, with the help of villagers her life was saved. This story of the prosecution, as indicated in the FIR, was intact till recording of statement by the Investigating Officer in terms of Section 180 BNSS. However, as per statement recorded before the Court concerned under Section 183 BNSS, the appellant slapped the victim and also pushed on earth and thereafter assaulted with kicks and fists and committed rape with the victim and she was also strangled and drowned in the river by the appellant. This statement further indicates that the appellant and victim were in love affair since 2019 and the victim was having intent to solemnize marriage with the appellant but the same could not be done on account of opposition of family members of the victim. Thus from this fact it can be deduced/inferred that the FIR, which is the basis of the criminal proceedings, was lodged by the victim under the pressure created by her family members. Further submission is that Medico Legal Examination does not support the story of the prosecution. The minor injuries sustained by the victim at neck could be caused by her family members on account of the relation of appellant and victim.

6. Further stated that the applicant, having no criminal antecedents, is in jail since 26.02.2025. Thus, taking note of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, indulgence of this Court is required in the matter and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

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

8. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., medical report as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) of victim recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation and also by the Court concerned.

9. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances as also 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.

10. The order dated 19.05.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Sultanpur, in Bail Application No.1210 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 40 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 74, 324(4), 109, 64 BNS and Section 3(2) (5), 3(1) w & 3(1)DA, DHA of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Bazar Shukul, District- Amethi, is hereby set aside.

11. Let appellant-Swaminath Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to 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.

12. 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. Order Date :- 28.7.2025 Vinay/- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

2. In the aforesaid background of the case, the Court with the assistance of Ms. Anjali Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Satyendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State, proceeded to hear the appeal on merits.

3. By means of instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 19.05.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Sultanpur, in Bail Application No.1210 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 40 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 74, 324(4), 109, 64 BNS and Section 3(2) (5), 3(1) w & 3(1)DA, DHA of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Bazar Shukul, District-Amethi.

4. It is stated that if the case of prosecution, with regard to relationship between the victim and appellant, is taken on its face value, then in that eventuality, it can be inferred that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case.

5. Further stated that victim, aged about 20 years, was in touch rather in the love affair with the appellant, aged about 25 years, however, this relationship was not formally recognized by the family members of the victim and therefore, the FIR, in connection with appellant is in jail, has been lodged by the victim under the pressure of her family members on 25.02.2025 at P.S.-Bazar Shukul, District-Amethi, registered as Case Crime No. 40 of 2025. As per this FIR, the appellant assaulted the victim and also tried to outrage her modesty and thereafter the victim strangled and drowned in the river by the appellant, however, with the help of villagers her life was saved. This story of the prosecution, as indicated in the FIR, was intact till recording of statement by the Investigating Officer in terms of Section 180 BNSS. However, as per statement recorded before the Court concerned under Section 183 BNSS, the appellant slapped the victim and also pushed on earth and thereafter assaulted with kicks and fists and committed rape with the victim and she was also strangled and drowned in the river by the appellant. This statement further indicates that the appellant and victim were in love affair since 2019 and the victim was having intent to solemnize marriage with the appellant but the same could not be done on account of opposition of family members of the victim. Thus from this fact it can be deduced/inferred that the FIR, which is the basis of the criminal proceedings, was lodged by the victim under the pressure created by her family members. Further submission is that Medico Legal Examination does not support the story of the prosecution. The minor injuries sustained by the victim at neck could be caused by her family members on account of the relation of appellant and victim.

6. Further stated that the applicant, having no criminal antecedents, is in jail since 26.02.2025. Thus, taking note of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, indulgence of this Court is required in the matter and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

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

8. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., medical report as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) of victim recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation and also by the Court concerned.

9. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances as also 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.

10. The order dated 19.05.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Sultanpur, in Bail Application No.1210 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 40 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 74, 324(4), 109, 64 BNS and Section 3(2) (5), 3(1) w & 3(1)DA, DHA of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Bazar Shukul, District- Amethi, is hereby set aside.

11. Let appellant-Swaminath Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to 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.

12. 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. Order Date :- 28.7.2025 Vinay/- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench