Rahul Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Srivastava, Gunjan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A., Ashish Agarwal, Ashish Kumar Dixit, Rajesh Kumar Singh, Sanjeev Pandey, Vijyant Nigam Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

1. Heard Sri Devesh Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Bal Keshwar Srivastava, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manish Vikram Singh Chauhan, the learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

2. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court on

04.07.2025: "The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.43/2020, under Sections 409, 420 I.P.C., P.S. Gomtinagar, District Lucknow. Heard learned counsel the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. According to the prosecution case, the informant came into contact with the accused through Instagram. It is alleged that the accused lured the informant and established physical relations with her on multiple occasions, resulting in her pregnancy. In May 2024, when the informant was four months pregnant, the accused allegedly aborted the pregnancy by forcibly administering medication. It is further alleged that the accused also took obscene photographs and videos of the victim. Additionally, in March 2025, the accused along with his associate Aditya, is said to 2 NABAIL No. 748 of 2025 have assaulted the informant at Lalganj. The accused also allegedly threatened to make her objectionable photos and videos viral. Furthermore, the informant claims to have given Rs. 85,000 in cash to the accused to support him financially on the assurance of marriage, but he neither returned the money nor fulfilled his promise to marry her. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the entire prosecution story is fabricated and baseless. He submits that no such amount, as alleged, was ever paid by the informant to the applicant. It is further submitted that the victim is habitual in extorting money from innocent persons and had also submitted an application to the concerned police station expressing her unwillingness to pursue any legal proceedings against the applicant and another individual, Krishan Singh. It is further argued that the victim was previously in a relationship with Krishan Singh, and she wanted to marry both the applicant and Krishan Singh. There is no evidence to substantiate the alleged abortion, and no objectionable photos or videos, as mentioned in the FIR, have been recovered during the investigation. There is no credible material on record implicating the applicant in the alleged offence. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation. Learned A.G.A. has strongly opposed the bail application and, on the basis instructions, informed the Court that the victim had received a cheque of Rs. 50,000 from the applicant in lieu of the alleged Rs. 85,000/- and had entered into a compromise with him. However, the prosecution failed to produce any material that would attract the provisions of Section 89 of the BNS, nor has any objectionable photograph or video been recovered during investigation. It has lastly been submitted that the investigation in the case is still ongoing. Issue notice to respondent No. 2. Steps be taken within a week. Learned Addl. Government Advocate is allowed 15 days' time to file counter affidavit. List on 04.08.2025. On due consideration to the fact that the victim accepted a cheque of Rs. 50,000 from the applicant, her previous conduct involving allegations of monetary extortion, and the applicant?s undertaking to cooperate with the investigation, this Court, in view of the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, finds it appropriate to 3 NABAIL No. 748 of 2025 grant interim anticipatory bail to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned. The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within twenty days from today. He shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection."

3. The learned A.G.A. has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation and a copy of charge sheet dated 09.07.2025.

4. The complainant has also filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copy of a compromise dated 03.05.2025 alleged to have got executed by the SHO by use of force.

5. The F.I.R. has been lodged by the opposite party no.2 against two named accused persons including the applicant and an unnamed person stating that the complainant developed friendship with the applicant through instagram on 05.01.2024. The applicant repetitively made physical relations with her under the allurement of marrying her. The complainant got pregnant, the applicant forcibly administered some medicine causing her miscarriage. Thereafter also the applicant made physical relations under allurement of marrying the complainant and he prepared obscene photo and video of the complainant but ultimately he declined to marry her and threatened to spread her obscene photo and video virally. The complainant further stated that she had given Rs.85,000/- to the applicant on 04.04.2025 but the amount has not been returned to her and she has come to know that the applicant has married elsewhere. 4 NABAIL No. 748 of 2025

6. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the applicant was major, she remained in a relationship with the applicant for a considerably long period of time and she repetitively made physical relations with the applicant without any use of force against her; that although the complainant has alleged that the applicant has forcibly cause her miscarriage, there is no medical evidence to prove this allegation; although the complainant has alleged that the applicant has prepared her obscene photo and video, this allegation could not be established by any material collected during investigation which already stands concluded and a charge sheet has already been submitted.

7. In these circumstances, this court finds no good ground to take a view different from the one taken by the coordinate Bench while passing the order dated 04.07.2025.

8. Accordingly, the interim order dated 04.07.2025 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid interim order. September 19, 2025 Ram. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Srivastava, Gunjan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A., Ashish Agarwal, Ashish Kumar Dixit, Rajesh Kumar Singh, Sanjeev Pandey, Vijyant Nigam Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

1. Heard Sri Devesh Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Bal Keshwar Srivastava, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manish Vikram Singh Chauhan, the learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

2. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court on

04.07.2025: "The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.43/2020, under Sections 409, 420 I.P.C., P.S. Gomtinagar, District Lucknow. Heard learned counsel the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. According to the prosecution case, the informant came into contact with the accused through Instagram. It is alleged that the accused lured the informant and established physical relations with her on multiple occasions, resulting in her pregnancy. In May 2024, when the informant was four months pregnant, the accused allegedly aborted the pregnancy by forcibly administering medication. It is further alleged that the accused also took obscene photographs and videos of the victim. Additionally, in March 2025, the accused along with his associate Aditya, is said to 2 NABAIL No. 748 of 2025 have assaulted the informant at Lalganj. The accused also allegedly threatened to make her objectionable photos and videos viral. Furthermore, the informant claims to have given Rs. 85,000 in cash to the accused to support him financially on the assurance of marriage, but he neither returned the money nor fulfilled his promise to marry her. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the entire prosecution story is fabricated and baseless. He submits that no such amount, as alleged, was ever paid by the informant to the applicant. It is further submitted that the victim is habitual in extorting money from innocent persons and had also submitted an application to the concerned police station expressing her unwillingness to pursue any legal proceedings against the applicant and another individual, Krishan Singh. It is further argued that the victim was previously in a relationship with Krishan Singh, and she wanted to marry both the applicant and Krishan Singh. There is no evidence to substantiate the alleged abortion, and no objectionable photos or videos, as mentioned in the FIR, have been recovered during the investigation. There is no credible material on record implicating the applicant in the alleged offence. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation. Learned A.G.A. has strongly opposed the bail application and, on the basis instructions, informed the Court that the victim had received a cheque of Rs. 50,000 from the applicant in lieu of the alleged Rs. 85,000/- and had entered into a compromise with him. However, the prosecution failed to produce any material that would attract the provisions of Section 89 of the BNS, nor has any objectionable photograph or video been recovered during investigation. It has lastly been submitted that the investigation in the case is still ongoing. Issue notice to respondent No. 2. Steps be taken within a week. Learned Addl. Government Advocate is allowed 15 days' time to file counter affidavit. List on 04.08.2025. On due consideration to the fact that the victim accepted a cheque of Rs. 50,000 from the applicant, her previous conduct involving allegations of monetary extortion, and the applicant?s undertaking to cooperate with the investigation, this Court, in view of the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, finds it appropriate to 3 NABAIL No. 748 of 2025 grant interim anticipatory bail to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned. The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within twenty days from today. He shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection."

3. The learned A.G.A. has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation and a copy of charge sheet dated 09.07.2025.

4. The complainant has also filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copy of a compromise dated 03.05.2025 alleged to have got executed by the SHO by use of force.

5. The F.I.R. has been lodged by the opposite party no.2 against two named accused persons including the applicant and an unnamed person stating that the complainant developed friendship with the applicant through instagram on 05.01.2024. The applicant repetitively made physical relations with her under the allurement of marrying her. The complainant got pregnant, the applicant forcibly administered some medicine causing her miscarriage. Thereafter also the applicant made physical relations under allurement of marrying the complainant and he prepared obscene photo and video of the complainant but ultimately he declined to marry her and threatened to spread her obscene photo and video virally. The complainant further stated that she had given Rs.85,000/- to the applicant on 04.04.2025 but the amount has not been returned to her and she has come to know that the applicant has married elsewhere. 4 NABAIL No. 748 of 2025

6. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the applicant was major, she remained in a relationship with the applicant for a considerably long period of time and she repetitively made physical relations with the applicant without any use of force against her; that although the complainant has alleged that the applicant has forcibly cause her miscarriage, there is no medical evidence to prove this allegation; although the complainant has alleged that the applicant has prepared her obscene photo and video, this allegation could not be established by any material collected during investigation which already stands concluded and a charge sheet has already been submitted.

7. In these circumstances, this court finds no good ground to take a view different from the one taken by the coordinate Bench while passing the order dated 04.07.2025.

8. Accordingly, the interim order dated 04.07.2025 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid interim order. September 19, 2025 Ram. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench