Mahroof @ Parwez vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh learned counsel for appellant, learned AG for State and Mr. Mrityunjay Verma Advocate holding brief on behalf of Mr. Brijendra Chaudhary learned counsel for respondent No. 2.

¶10

Counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 is taken on record. Learned counsel for appellant submits that he does not wish to file rejoinder-affidavit.

¶11

This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14A(2) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to set aside order dated 7th January 2026 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh in Case Crime No. 281 of 2025, under Section 87, 64(2)M, 352, 351(3), 108 Β.N.S And 3/5(1)(3) Uttar Pradesh Unlawful Religion Act, 2021 and 3(2)va, 3(2)v S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station-Lilapur, District Pratapgarh. Further, a prayer has been made to enlarge the appellant on bail in the said case crime.

¶12

As per contents of First Information Report, the appellant forcibly established physical relations with the daughter of complainant and also video-graphed the obscene activities which were being used to blackmail her into further physical relationship.

¶13

Allegation is also being made that he threatened to get her religion changed and also to murder members of the family whereever her marriage

¶14

CRLA No. 422 of 2026

¶15

2

¶16

took place. It is also stated that when the complainant came to know about the aforesaid facts, the appellant was confronted but issued the same threats to the complainant as well.

¶17

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has been falsely implicated in the allegations levelled against him and has adverted to the statement of the alleged victim recorded under section 183 BNSS where she has denied the aforesaid allegations and has specifically stated with regard to consensual relationship between her and the appellant and the fact that she wanted to marry him but was being opposed by the family member. He has also adverted to the fact that despite such a statement being made by the alleged victim under Section 183 BNSS, chargesheet was filed ignoring the aforesaid statement only on the ground that the alleged victim was changing her stand since she had taken a contrary stand in the statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS.

¶18

Learned counsel submits that it is on the basis of the said facts that appellant was taken into custody on 29th October 2025 whereafter the alleged victim committed suicide due to which Section 306 IPC has been imputed.

¶19

Learned counsel has thereafter drawn attention to the statement of family members recorded and does not indicate any such aspect which led to the suicide being committed at the instance or abetment by the appellant. It is therefore submitted that ingredients of Section 107 Cr.P.C. are not made out. It is also submitted that appellant without any previous criminal history,is under incarceration since 29th October 2025.

¶20

Learned counsel for respondents has opposed the appeal with submission that there was clear contradiction in the statement of alleged victim recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS as has also been indicated in the statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS. It is submitted that recovery of obscene videos from the mobile was also indicated at the time of investigation. Learned counsel has also adverted to statements of family members of the alleged victim to submit that she had met the appellant on 29th October 2025 itself whereafter she committed suicide and therefore the aforesaid aspect clearly indicates proximity due to which ingredients of Section 306 read with Section 108 BNS are made out.

¶21

CRLA No. 422 of 2026

¶22

3

¶23

Learned Additional Government Advocate on the basis of counteraffidavit admits that the appellant does not have any previous criminal history.

¶24

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of the material on record, at this stage without entering into the merits of the case and subject to evidence being led in trial, it appears that although the victim had indicated a different aspect in a statement recorded under section 180 BNSS but in a statement under section 183 BNSS, she had clearly admitted a consensual relationship between the two as well as the fact that she wanted to marry the appellant but was being opposed by her family members who sought to marry her elsewhere.

¶25

At this stage and subject to evidence during the course of trial, the applicability of Section 306 read with Section 107 Cr.P.C. would require to be established particularly with regard to proximity of any such act on the part of the appellant which directly led to the victim committing suicide.

¶26

The appellant without previous criminal history is in incarceration since 29th October, 2025 and is only of 22 years of age and therefore the aspect of keeping him under incarceration interminably may affect the reformatory aspect.

¶27

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for appellant, it is apparent that the impugned order has been passed without appreciating the submission made on behalf of appellant and as such the order impugned by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 7th January, 2026 is set aside.

¶28

Let appellant/applicant Mahroof @ Parwez, involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

CRLA No. 422 of 2026

¶32

4

¶33

(iii) The appellant/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.

¶34

(iv) The appellant/applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶35

(v) The appellant/applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code (now Section 269 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023).

¶36

(vi) In case, the appellant/applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the appellant/applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code (now Section 209 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023).

¶37

The pending application if any too stands disposed of.

¶38

(Manish Mathur,J.)

¶39

April 6, 2026 prabhat

¶40

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

Mahroof @ Parwez v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahroof @ Parwez v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

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

Motilal and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Horticulture Evam Food Processing Deptt., Lko. and 3 Others

Shiv Saran Singh and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and Another

Gauri Shankar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and 4 Others

Kaustubh Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Law and Legal Remembrancer and 3 Others

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Mishra and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 3 Others

Head Constable , PNO-112465067, Hakim Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others