Anupam Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10363

Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1175 of 2025 Applicant :- Anupam Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Shukla,Shreshth Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Ashutosh Kumar Shukla and Sri Shreshth Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri RanVijay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Ms. Anamika Singh, learned counsel who has filed 'Vakalatnama' for the informant, same is taken on record.

¶5

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

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 6.1.2025 in Case Crime No. 0192 of 2024 u/s 64(2), 74, 333 & 351(2) B.N.S., P.S. Gadaganj, District Raebareli. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged.

¶7

As per Annexure no. S.A.-1 the applicant has been acquitted by the learned trial court in Criminal Case No. 1455 of 2022 vide judgment and order dated 30.9.2022.

¶8

Attention has been drawn towards impugned F.I.R. which has been lodged on 30.8.2024 for the alleged incident dated 22.8.2024 without explaining the delay of 8 days. Initially, while lodging the F.I.R. no allegation of rape was levelled against the present applicant. Not only the above while recording her statement u/s 180 BNSS no allegation of rape has been levelled against the present applicant but while recording her statement u/s 183 BNSS on 4.9.2024 the allegation of rape has been levelled. In such statement the prosecutrix has stated that the present applicant used to blackmail her showing her obscene videos but during the investigation no such video has been recovered, therefore, the charge-sheet has not been filed under the Information Technology Act. Learned counsel has stated that the informant / prosecutrix is a married lady and the present applicant was having cordial relation with her as they are known to each other even

¶9

before her marriage. Charge-sheet has been filed in this case.

¶10

The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

¶11

Per contra, Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned A.G.A. as well as Ms. Anamika Singh, learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail. Ms. Singh has stated that the present applicant was teasing the prosecurix before her marriage and after she got married the applicant kept on teasing her by making regular calls and by approaching her having ill motive. She has further stated that initially out of shame she could not level allegation against the present applicant regarding rape while lodging F.I.R. and recording statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. but while recording statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. she narrated the actual story. Though the reason of delay of 8 days in lodging the F.I.R. has not been explained at this stage but learned counsel for the informant has stated that the aforesaid fact may be explained during the course of trial.

¶12

Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that F.I.R. has been lodged on 30.8.2024 for the alleged incident dated 22.8.2024 without explaining the delay of 8 days, initially, while lodging the F.I.R. no allegation of rape was levelled against the present applicant, while recording her statement u/s 180 BNSS no allegation of rape has been levelled against the present applicant but while recording her statement u/s 183 BNSS the allegation of rape has been levelled, in the statement the prosecutrix has stated that the present applicant used to blackmail her showing her obscene videos but during the investigation no such video has been recovered, the informant / prosecutrix is a married lady and the present applicant was having cordial relation with her as they are

¶13

known to each other even before her marriage, chargesheet has been filed in this case and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶14

9. Bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant Anupam Yadav , involved in aforesaid case 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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 may be issued and if 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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

Order Date :- 18.2.2025/Om

¶21

Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anupam Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anupam Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dharmendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 3 Others

Smt. Afsari Khatoon Alias Gudia Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko.

Dharmendra Kumar Mishra @ Babban Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Jagapatiya and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Munesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Shashi Bala Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko.