Deepak Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12261 of 2024 Applicant :- Deepak Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Singh Rana Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandra Bhushan,Kapil Dixit Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶1Heard Shri Rahul Singh Rana, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Diwakar Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents. No one has appeared on behalf of the complainant nor any request for any adjournment has been made.

¶2Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA is taken on record. Learned counsel for the applicant stated he does not wish to file rejoinder affidavit and will address the Court on the basis of material available on record.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated and is in jail since

14.10.2024 in FIR/ Case Crime No.350 of 2024 under Sections 366, 376, 506 IPC, police station Kotwali Lalganj, District Raebareli.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court to impugned FIR, wherein the date of incident is

16.06.2024 and the FIR has been lodged on 27.07.2024, without explaining the inordinate delay of more than one month. The aforesaid FIR has been lodged pursuant to the application being filed under Section 175(3) BNSS and in such application the delay has not been explained.

¶5Learned counsel has stated that the prosecutrix is a married lady of 28 years having two children. She treats the present applicant as her nephew. In her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS she has not levelled any allegation against the present applicant. However, while recording her statement under Section 183 BNSS, she has levelled allegation of establishing physical relationship with the applicant. She herself has admitted that she had gone to Mumbai with the present applicant on 16.06.2024 and remained there for three months, where the physical relationship have been established for a couple of times. Since the FIR has been lodged after a substantial delay, therefore, the medical report has not substantiated the prosecution story.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicant has lastly submitted that in the aforesaid circumstances the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal history and if the present applicant be enlarged on bail, he undertakes that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order.

¶7Learned AGA has, however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material on record, it transpires that the no allegation was levelled against the applicant in statement recorded by the complainant in her statement under Section 180 BNSS and she also denied medical examination and the complainant levelled allegation against the applicant only in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS. Further, the applicant has no criminal history, therefore, without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

¶9Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶10Let applicant-Deepak Pandey 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 file an undertaking to the effect that he / she 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 / her under Section 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 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 / her, in accordance with law, under Section 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 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 / her in accordance with law.

(v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 19.12.2024 Arnima High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench