High Court · 2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ranvijay Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. No one has appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2, however, notice has been served.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit, same is taken on record.

4. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Naeem) is languishing in jail since 18.09.2024 in Case Crime No.0195 of 2024, under Sections 74, 76 and 64(1) of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station- Kaudiya, District- Gonda. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

5. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR wherein the date of incident has been indicated as 21.07.2024 but the FIR has been lodged on 23.07.2024 without explaining the delay of two days. In the impugned FIR, the general allegation has been levelled against the present applicant and one Saddam. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the co- accused Saddam has already been granted anticipatory bail.

6. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure SA-1 of the supplementary affidavit showing the statement of prosecutrix/victim/PW-3 wherein during cross examination, she has categorically stated that she has not recognized the present applicant, who is present in the court. He has committed any misdeeds with her. She further clarified that he has not committed rape with her. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant has stated that since the prosecutrix has not supported the prosecution version, so he may be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Chargesheet 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, shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly.

7. Per contra, Sri Ranvijay Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the aforesaid bail but did not dispute the aforesaid contentions of learned counsel for the applicant.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the co-accused Saddam has already been granted anticipatory bail, statement of prosecutrix/victim/PW-3 wherein during cross examination, she has categorically stated that she has not recognized the present applicant, who is present in the court; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; 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 he 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.

9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

10. Let the applicant (Naeem) 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 appear before the Investigating Officer to cooperate in the investigation and shall further remain present to cooperate in the investigation as and when the Investigating Team calls him to appear and if the charge-sheet is filed against him he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

11. Before parting with, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial invoking the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C./346 B.N.S.S. without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties, fixing short date, if possible, on day to day basis and if any of the parties does not cooperate in the trial court proceedings properly, any appropriate coercive steps may be taken by the trial court strictly in accordance with law. Order Date :- 1.8.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ranvijay Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. No one has appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2, however, notice has been served.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit, same is taken on record.

4. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Naeem) is languishing in jail since 18.09.2024 in Case Crime No.0195 of 2024, under Sections 74, 76 and 64(1) of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station- Kaudiya, District- Gonda. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

5. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR wherein the date of incident has been indicated as 21.07.2024 but the FIR has been lodged on 23.07.2024 without explaining the delay of two days. In the impugned FIR, the general allegation has been levelled against the present applicant and one Saddam. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the co- accused Saddam has already been granted anticipatory bail.

6. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure SA-1 of the supplementary affidavit showing the statement of prosecutrix/victim/PW-3 wherein during cross examination, she has categorically stated that she has not recognized the present applicant, who is present in the court. He has committed any misdeeds with her. She further clarified that he has not committed rape with her. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant has stated that since the prosecutrix has not supported the prosecution version, so he may be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Chargesheet 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, shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly.

7. Per contra, Sri Ranvijay Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the aforesaid bail but did not dispute the aforesaid contentions of learned counsel for the applicant.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the co-accused Saddam has already been granted anticipatory bail, statement of prosecutrix/victim/PW-3 wherein during cross examination, she has categorically stated that she has not recognized the present applicant, who is present in the court; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; 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 he 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.

9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

10. Let the applicant (Naeem) 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 appear before the Investigating Officer to cooperate in the investigation and shall further remain present to cooperate in the investigation as and when the Investigating Team calls him to appear and if the charge-sheet is filed against him he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

11. Before parting with, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial invoking the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C./346 B.N.S.S. without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties, fixing short date, if possible, on day to day basis and if any of the parties does not cooperate in the trial court proceedings properly, any appropriate coercive steps may be taken by the trial court strictly in accordance with law. Order Date :- 1.8.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench