Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36602 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 450 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Kaleem Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Pandey,Rajesh Kumar,Suhail Kashif Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in FIR/ Case Crime No. 276 of 2024, under Sections 376 (2) (N), 354Ga, 504, 506 of IPC, Police Station Subeha, District Barabanki. 3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. raise material doubt in the prosecution story. He submits that in fact the applicant was 19 years of age at the time of incident and no rape has been committed upon her. Further added that from perusal of the statement of the victim including the FIR, the ingredients of Section 376 of IPC do not attract in the present matter. He added that the reason for alleging rape with the victim is because of some complaint made by the applicant regarding the character of the victim to her father which is evident from the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix. Further submitted that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 02.11.2024 and there is no previous criminal antecedent. Chargesheet has been filed, thus, thus, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidences and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 4. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that after thorough investigation, it was found that the applicant was involved in committing offence and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. 5. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 02.11.2024; prima facie, the statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. raise material doubt in the prosecution story and from perusal of the statement of the victim including the FIR, the ingredients of Section 376 of IPC do not attract; chargesheet has already been filed; there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 6. 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. 7. Let the applicant- Mohd. Kaleem 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 IPC (Now Section 269 BNS); (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. (Now Section 351 BNSS); 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. (Now Section 84 BNSS) 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 IPC (Now Section 209 BNS). 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 :- 26.6.2025 Mohd. Sharif Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench