Vivek v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt

Sri Sarvesh Kumar Misra, advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant and the same is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sarvesh Kumar Misra, counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 126 of 2025 under sections 137(2), 87, 64(1)M of B.N.S. 2023 and 5/6 of Pocso Act P.S.- Kotwali Akbarpur District - Ambedkar Nagar. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the medical examination report is evident that the victim was 18 years of age at the time of incident and the statement under section 183 BNSS is evident that she went away with the applicant with her own sweet will and was having physical relationship with him.

He next submits that the statement of the victim demolished the story of the prosecution and that would not lead to the punishment. Adding his arguments, he submits that the chargesheet has been filed against the applicant thus, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidence or would threaten the witnesses coupled with the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 17 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 20.04.2025 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Learned counsel for the complainant appearing has supported the version of counsel for the applicant and submits that under certain misconception, the first information report was lodged and no such incident has ever taken place.

Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State though, has opposed the case on merits, but he has no objection if the victim herself has stated that she is of 18 years of age and she went away with the applicant with her own sweet will. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the medical examination report is evident that the victim was 18 years of age at the time of incident and the statement under section 183 BNSS is evident that she went away with the applicant with her own sweet will; the chargesheet has been filed; the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.04.2025; the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 17 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant- Vivek involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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.

He 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 of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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.; and (4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 26.6.2025 Mayank MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench