Harsh Srivastava @ Akash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8774

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3934 of 2024

Appellant :- Harsh Srivastava @ Akash Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Aditya Tiwari,Prashant Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Kamlesh Kumar Gupta and Ashish Kumar Gupta on behalf of learned counsel for the respondent is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

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 07.12.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Lucknow in bail application no. 9097 of 2024 in case crime no. 193 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 64(1), 351(3), 352 B.N.S., 2023 & section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Alambagh, District Lucknow.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that in this case he is innocent and has falsely been implicated for committing rape with the victim who was major at the time of incident. It is further submitted that both of them were in affair and physical relations were established with consent, therefore, no offence under Section 64(1) B.N.S. can be said to be made out. It is also submitted that no any injury was found on the person of the victim during medical examination to suggest that rape was committed with her. The statement of the victim as recorded before the learned Magistrate also shows that there was affair between both the parties. The trial court while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. Appellant is in jail since 22.10.2024, having no criminal history. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

¶10

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent as well as learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

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

¶12

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the period of appellant remained in jail having no any criminal antecedent and without making any further comment on the merit of the case, 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.

¶13

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

¶14

Let the appellant Harsh Srivastava @ Akash involved in Case Crime No. 193 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 64(1), 351(3), 352 B.N.S., 2023 & section 3(1) (r), 3(1)(s) & section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Alambagh, District Lucknow 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.

¶15

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 pressurize/ 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 she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected.

¶20

The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 11.2.2025 Suraj Srivastav

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Harsh Srivastava @ Akash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harsh Srivastava @ Akash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Mursheed @ Mo. Murseed and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Rubi Devi Thru. Her Husband Mukesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Chhotkauo @ Israil Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Nankoo vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko and Another

Rajmani Singh Chauhan vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Smt. Mayavati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another