Deepak Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11819

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1791 of 2025

Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Islam Khan,Syed Jafar Husain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Mohd. Islam Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Rafia Farooqui, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Deepak Kumar) is languishing in jail since 27.12.2024 in Case Crime No.0091 of 2024, under Section 64 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short B.N.S), Police Station- Inhauna, District- Amethi. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

¶8

The informant/prosecutrix is a married lady having one daughter aged about 12 years, whereas, the present applicant is a young person of 19 years. As per allegation of the FIR, the present applicant has established physical relation with the prosecutrix on the pretext of false promise of marriage and when the prosecutrix compelled him to get married, he started to keep distance with her.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the prosecution story is highly improbable inasmuch as a married lady may not allege that any person has established physical relation with her on the pretext of false promise of marriage. As a matter of fact, the prosecutrix being a neighbour of the applicant was having cordial relation, but the other allegations are false and misconceived. Similar allegation has been levelled by the prosecution while recording her statements under Section 181 & 183 of B.N.S.S., the prosecutrix refused to get herself medically examine. The statement of the husband of the prosecutrix has been enclosed Annexure-5, wherein, he has indicated that he was doing some jop at Dubai where he came to know that his wife is having illicit relation with the applicant. The statement of the daughter of the prosecutrix has also been enclosed as Annexure-5, wherein, the young child of 12 years has categorically stated that her mother was having relation

¶10

with the present applicant and on such relation her grand parents used to object but her mother did not care such objection and permitted the applicant to sleep with her.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Charge-sheet has been filed. He has undertaken on behalf of the present 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.

¶12

On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant by submitting that the allegation against the present applicant is serious in nature, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail,

¶13

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the informant/prosecutrix is a married lady having one daughter aged about 12 years, whereas, the present applicant is a young person of 19 years; statement of the husband of the prosecutrix enclosed as Annexure-5, wherein, he has indicated that he was doing some job at Dubai where he came to know that his wife is having illicit relation with the applicant and statement of the daughter of the prosecutrix enclosed as Annexure-5, wherein, the young child of 12 years has categorically stated that her mother was having relation with the present applicant and on such relation her grand parents used to object but her mother did not care such objection and permitted the applicant to sleep with her; 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.

¶14

Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant- Deepak Kumar 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:-

¶16

(i) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as

¶17

abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(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. is issued and the applicants fail 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(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. 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.

¶21

Order Date :- 27.2.2025 Reena/-

¶22

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Deepak Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Kumar 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

Shivam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Smt. Neelam Vs Stat of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Shivam vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Rakesh @ Rakesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home District Lko. and 3 Others

Amrit Lal @ Bachcha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Yogesh Pratap @ Ankur Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.