Patirakhan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

By means of this application, the applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No.775 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 351(3) BNS (Old Sections 376, 506 IPC), Police Station - Kheri, District - Lakhimpur Kheri, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶13

The brief facts of the case are that the F.I.R. dated 23.10.2025 has been lodged under Sections 74 and 351(2) BNS, which was subsequently converted into Sections 64(1), 351(3) BNS (Old Sections 376, 506 IPC), against the applicant by the informant / victim alleging therein that on 22.10.2025 at around 6.00 AM when she reached near the sugarcane field to attend the call of nature, the applicant who was sitting there started teasing her and touching her body parts and said that as the son of your brother-inlaw ( Jeth ) had teased my daughter, I am going to take revenge with you. She raised alarm and on hearing the same the villagers gathered there, then the applicant ran away from there.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged by the victim/ informant on 23.10.2025 at about 19.06 hours as a counter blast of an F.I.R. registered on the same date against the son of the brotherin-law (Jeth) of the informant at 18.01 hours under Sections 74, 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS and Section 7/8 POCSO Act by the applicant.

¶15

BAIL No. 2703 of 2026

¶16

2

¶17

It is further submitted that the victim/ informant in her statement recorded under Sections 180 BNSS has improvised the story and stated that the applicant had done forcible act with her in sugarcane field but in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS, she has stated that he torn her blouse and opened her sari and raped her and when she raised alarm, the villagers came there then the applicant ran away from there by saying that the son of your brother-in-law (jeth) had outraged the modesty of my daughter, I will not leave you.

¶18

It is further submitted that the medical report also does not corroborate with the prosecution story for the reason that in the medical report the hymen was old, torn and healed and the opinion of the doctor is 'there is no sign of use of force, sexual violence cannot be ruled out. Final opinion reserve pending availability FSL report.'

¶19

It is further submitted that the accused in the F.I.R. lodged by the applicant has been granted bail, copy of the bail order has been filed through supplementary affidavit, which is taken on record.

¶20

It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history, he has falsely been implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 15.01.2026.

¶21

On the other hand learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer but he is unable to dispute the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant, particularly, it is a case of counter blast.

¶22

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, prima facie, it appears that the F.I.R. has been lodged by the informant/ victim as a counter blast. The victim was the informant herself but at the time of lodging of the F.I.R. she has not made any allegation of rape against the applicant and she has improvised the case in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS. Prima facie, the medical report also does not corroborate with the prosecution story. Therefore, it is a fit case in which the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶23

Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed .

¶24

BAIL No. 2703 of 2026

¶25

3

¶26

Let the applicant Patirakhan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶27

(i) The applicant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶28

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶29

(iii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es).

¶30

(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence.

¶31

(v) The applicant 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.

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

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.

¶36

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

¶37

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶38

April 16, 2026 S. Kumar

¶39

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

Patirakhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Patirakhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Similar cases

Asharam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Pankaj Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko.

Om Prakash Tiwari and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Mukesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mukesh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt. of U.P. Lko. and Another

Ramdutt Pal vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.