Deepu Vs State of U.P, Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:6244

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3534 of 2024 Appellant :- Deepu Respondent :- State Of U.P, Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Kumar Sharma,Prabhu Sharan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dharmendra Kumar Misra

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record.

¶6

Pleadings have been exchanged.

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 16.10.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Unnao.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that he is innocent and has committed no offence but has been falsely implicated in this case for committing rape with the victim who is said to be aged about 20 years in the F.I.R and even during medical examination she was found to be more than 18 years. It is further submitted that the incident is said to have committed on 8.8.2024 regarding which the F.I.R was lodged on 14.08.2024 after delay of 06 days. It is also submitted that during course of medical examination six weeks and five days pregnancy was found positive which shows that she was in relation with some other person prior to the alleged incident but the present false F.I.R has been lodged against the present appellant. It is also submitted that no any external or internal injury was found on the person of the victim during medical examination which also shows that she was not compelled by the appellant. It is also submitted that the appellant is in jail since 07.09.2024 having no criminal antecedent.These facts were not taken into consideration by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, while rejecting the bail, therefore, requested to set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.

¶10

Learned counsel for the complainant as well as AGA opposed

¶11

the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case the victim has given statement against the appellant before Investigating Officer and learned Magistrate under sections 180/183 B.N.S.S (under sections 161/164 Cr.P.C), therefore, the appellant cannot be said innocent.

¶12

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for complainant as well as learned A.G.A and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.

¶13

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, version in F.I.R, the age of the victim and the medical report showing the pregnancy of six weeks and five days, incident taking place 7 days prior to medical examination and without making any further comment on merit, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is to be allowed.

¶14

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.

¶15

Let the appellant- Deepu, involved in Case Crime No. 212 of 2024, under Sections 64(1), 126(2),351(3) B.N.S & Sections 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, P. S Safipur, District Unnao be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶16

The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

The appellant will not pressurise/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶20

The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the

¶21

facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶23

Order Date :- 29.1.2025

¶24

GS

¶25

Digitally signed by :- GHAN SHYAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Deepu v. State of U.P, Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepu v. State of U.P, Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

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

Madhuri Patel Vs Addl. Chief Judicail Magistrate, Tehsil Kunda, Pratapgarh and Others

Anand Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Smt. Mamta Thru. Her Husband Viresh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Deepu vs State of U.P, Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Aryan Gupta vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Faiz Mohd. and 6 Ors. Vs State of U.P.