Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:5541 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 859 of 2025 Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Upadhyay Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and Ms. Sheela Baidya, Advocate who has filed 'Vakalatnama' on behalf of complainant, same is taken on record. 2. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 22.12.2024 in Case Crime No. 192 of 2024, u/s 89, 316(2), 69, 351(2), 318(4), 82(2) BNS, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Bahraich. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. 3. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the date of incident has been indicated as 30.9.2024 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 1.12.2024 without explaining the aforesaid inordinate delay. As per allegation of the F.I.R. the informant is a married lady having one daughter of 15 years but her relation with her husband was not cordial, therefore, she was not living with her husband. At the same time the present applicant is also a married person having children. Both are the middle-aged persons inasmuch as the applicant is 35 years old and the prosecutrix is 39 years old. She has levelled allegation against the present applicant that on the pretext of false promise of marriage he established physical relation with her. Even both got married in one Arya Samaj Mandir. There is some monetary dispute between the parties. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Investigation is pending in this case. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted. 5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the prayer for bail. Ms. Sheela Baidya has stated that the present applicant cheated the prosecutrix as he got married with her in one Arya Samaj Mandir. Not only the above the applicant took Rs. 7,00,000/- from the prosecutrix for providing her suitable job and that amount has not been returned to her till date. 6. Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that the date of incident has been indicated as 30.9.2024 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 1.12.2024 without explaining the aforesaid inordinate delay, the informant is a married lady having one daughter of 15 years, the present applicant is also a married person having children, the applicant and complainant are the middle- aged persons inasmuch as the applicant is 35 years old and the prosecutrix is 39 years old, allegation against the present applicant is that on the pretext of false promise of marriage he established physical relation with her though both got married in one Arya Samaj Mandir, there is some monetary dispute between the parties, applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever, investigation is pending in this case and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, 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:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he / she 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 / her under Section 269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him / her in accordance with law, under Section 208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (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 351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. 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 / her in accordance with law. . (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 28.1.2025/Om Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench