Mahendra Modanwal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:133793

Court No. - 83

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4486 of 2025

Appellant :- Mahendra Modanwal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Pratibha Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Heard Mrs. Pratibha Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA as well as perused the entire record.

¶7

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant- Mahendra Modanwal to set aside the bail rejection order dated 24.4.2025 in Bail Application No.80 of 2025 and to release him on bail in Case Crime No.210 of 2018, under Sections 452, 376, 313, 323, 506 IPC and Section 3(2) (V), 3(1)(Dha) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Kokhraj, District- Kaushambi.

¶8

As per prosecution version appellant and co-accused Mahendra Modanwal have committed rape on the victim first time on 17.9.2017. Thereafter, they have committed repeated rape on her due to which she became pregnant and appellant compelled her to remove pregnancy.

¶9

Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The applicant has been summoned during trial under Section 319 Cr.P.C. There is no allegation of rape against the appellant. As per medical, there is no internal or external injury found on the body of the victim. There are major contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C.. After investigation, charge sheet has been submitted only against co-accused- Bihari Lal on 03.09.2018. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this Court towards the bail order of the co-accused Bihari Lal, who is the main

¶10

accused, has committed rape upon the victim, has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.1.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal No.5126 of 2018 (Bihari Lal Vs. State of U.P. and Another). Further submission is that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. Appellant is languishing in jail since 10.04.2025 having no criminal history.

¶11

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶12

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties 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, role assigned to the present appellant and the nature of injury, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶14

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

¶15

Let the appellant- Mahendra Modanwal, involved in aforesaid case crime number 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

(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

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

¶19

(iv) 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

(v) 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 him 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 :- 7.8.2025 Krishna*

¶23

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mahendra Modanwal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Modanwal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases