Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:4233 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28 of 2025 Applicant :- Adil Ansari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Gyan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Gyan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. as well as Sri Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, advocate who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the informant/ complainant, which is taken on record. 2. This Court has passed an order on 06.01.2025 which reads as under:- "1. Heard Dr. Gyan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ravi Srivastava, learned AGA for opposite party no.1. 2. Learned AGA has submitted that notice has been served on the opposite party on 1.1.2025, but none has put in appearance on his behalf. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant has got married with the prosecutrix and with the aforesaid wedlock they have been blessed with a baby girl who is about five months old. The present applicant and prosecutrix belong to the same caste. The applicant is willing to live with the prosecutrix and his infant daughter but the family members of the prosecutrix are not agreeable for that. So as to verify the aforesaid fact the presence of prosecutrix and informant would be required on the next date. 8. Therefore, list this case on 22.1.2025. 9. On the said date the informant and prosecutrix shall appear in person before this Court. 10. Station House Officer, P.S. Sangipur, District Pratapgarh shall ensure the presence of the aforesaid persons on the next date. 11. The AGA shall intimate this order to the S.H.O. concerned for its compliance." 3. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the informant/ complainant and prosecutrix (X) along with her female child of five months are present in person. 4. Mr. Rohit Kumar, Sub Inspector and Ms. Swati Verma, Sub Inspector, Police Station- Sangipur, District- Pratapgarh has ensured the presence of the prosecutrix and the informant/ complainant. 5. The prosecutrix has informed this Court that though the applicant is the father of her child but he is already married and this fact has been concealed by the applicant from the her, therefore, she is not willing to live with the applicant and she would claim maintenance etc. from the applicant for herself and for her five months old child, though she accepted that she was in affairs with the applicant who established physical relations with her on the pretext of marriage. 6. The prosecutrix has further stated that the present applicant has not got married with her and the statement given on earlier date is false. 7. Father of the prosecutrix namely Mohd. Ekhlak Ahmad has also stated that he is not ready to get his daughter married with the applicant as the applicant has cheated his daughter by concealing the fact that he is already a married person. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant had already intimated the prosecutrix that he is a married person but he would marry with her as his religion permits for second marriage also. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is ready to marry with the prosecutrix if the prosecutrix agrees for the same and if the prosecutrix does not want to marry with the applicant at this stage, the applicant is ready to maintain her as his wife and and the child as well, as per law. Learned counsel for the applicant stated that the applicant has no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. 9. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant undertakes that if he is enlarged on bail, he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 10. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant/ complainant have, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that since the present applicant has cheated the prosecutrix by concealing the fact that he is already a married person and established physical relation with her on the pretext of false promise of marriage, therefore, his bail application may be rejected. 11. Without entering into merits of the issue, considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR and the fact that the prosecutrix is herself stating before this Court that she was in affairs with the applicant and established physical relations on the promise of marriage and from the said physical relations they have been blessed with a female child; the under taking of the applicant that he is ready to marry with the prosecutrix if she is ready for the same and till such marriage takes place, he will maintain the prosecutrix as his wife and the child as well, as per law; the applicant has no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and the undertaking of the applicant that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. 12. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 13. Let the applicant- Adil Ansari be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:- (i) The 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. (ii) The 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. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the 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. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Order Date :- 22.1.2025 (Manoj K.) Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench