Naimish Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Special Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40602

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 57 of 2025

Appellant :- Naimish Kumar Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Special Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Khaleeq Ahmad Khan,Santosh Kumar Kanaujia Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Nitin Rastogi

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Case called out. As per office report dated 05.02.2025, notice has been served upon opposite party no.2. The name of Shri Nitin Rastogi, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 is printed in the cause list, but he is not present today to press this appeal which relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail. Learned AGA is present in the Court. In these circumstances, the Court proceeded to hear the appeal on merits.

¶7

Heard counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 (in short 'SC/ST Act') against the impugned order dated 13.12.2024 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No.452 of 2024, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.319 of 2024, under Sections- 376, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Sections- 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Haiderabad, District- Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶9

While pressing the present appeal, learned counsel for the appellant stated that the informant/opposite party no.2 (victim), aged about 26 years, lodged the FIR No.0319 on 24.10.2024 at Police Station- Haiderabad, District -Kheri making allegations to attract offence under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act. From a bare perusal of the FIR, which is annexed as Annexure No.1 to the appeal, it is apparent that the victim and appellant were in affair and physical relations were also established, but for some reasons the relationship could not continue, therefore, the FIR was lodged making allegations therein so as to attract offence under Section 376 I.P.C. and other sections. If the case of prosecution is taken on its face value then in that eventuality, possibility of conviction of appellant is bleak in view of law settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment(s) rendered in the case of Deepak Gulati vs. State of Haryana, (2013) 7 SCC 675; Sonu @ Subhash

¶10

Kumar vs. State of U.P. and Another, (2021) 7 SCC; Mandar Deepak Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 2110 and Amol Bhagwan Nehul vs. State of Maharashtra and another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1230 , which are related to making physical relation on the pretext of marriage.

¶11

It is further submitted that appellant, having no criminal history, is languishing in jail since 26.10.2024. In these circumstances, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and the appellant be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the appellant.

¶13

Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and all the relevant documents placed on record.

¶14

Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A., F.I.R., impugned order, as also the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments, referred above, including that the appellant is in jail since 26.10.2024 and chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed .

¶15

Order dated 13.12.2024 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No.452 of 2024, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.319 of 2024, under Sections376, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Sections- 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Haiderabad, DistrictLakhimpur Kheri is hereby set aside.

¶16

Let the appellant- Naimish Kumar Verma be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :-

¶17

(i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶18

(ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶19

(iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s).

¶20

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel.

¶23

(vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶24

(viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶25

In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

¶26

As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order.

¶27

Order Date :- 16.7.2025 Anand/-

¶28

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

Naimish Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Special Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naimish Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Special Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jai Singh Vs State of U.P.

Salamtulla and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Ram Bilas and Another Vs State of U.P.

Satish Lodhi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Prem Kumar vs Dr. Vijay Bahadur Dwivedi, Dir. Horticulture and Food Processing, Lko. and Another

Rehana Fatima vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko. and 3 Others