Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36452 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 311 of 2025 Applicant :- Anoop Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwini Kumar Ojha,Archana Rawat,Nirmala Yadav,Rahul Kumar Kaushal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in S.T. No. 1369 of 2024, Case Crime No. 446 of 2024, under Sections 64(1), 352, 351(3) of BNS and Sections 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the instant case due to ulterior motive. She further submits that force is missing in the present matter and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 183 of BNS creates material doubt in the prosecution story. She further added that the statement of the victim is also evident that on call of the present applicant, she went to the house of the applicant and she used to talk with the applicant and, thus, she was relation with the applicant. She further submits that the prosecution, prima facie, failed to substantiate that the rape has been committed with the prosecutrix and also submits that the applicant has a case criminal history which has been explained. She next submits that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he undertakes that the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.10.2024 and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and has submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the heinous offence and, as such, he is not entitled for bail. Having considered the submissions of learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 183 of BNS creates material doubt in the prosecution story; on call of the applicant, the prosecutrix used to talk with the applicant and she also went to the house of the applicant and, as such, she was having relation with the applicant; the prosecution has failed to substantiate that the rape has been committed with the prosecutrix; the applicant has explained a case criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 26.10.2024 and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Anoop Saroj involved in the aforementioned 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He 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; (3) 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.; and (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 25.6.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench