Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10405 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 917 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohammad Nazim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Tewari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jaibind Singh Rathour,Kartik Rawat Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1.Heard Sri Mukesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Sri Jaibind Singh Rathour, learned counsel for the complainant/ informant. 2. Sri Mukesh Kumar Tiwari, leanred counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit and the rejoinder affidavit, today in the Court, the same are taken on record. 3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Mohammad Nazim) is languishing in jail since 07.12.2024 in Case Crime No.707 of 2024, under Section 69 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short B.N.S.), Police Station-Ram Nagar, District-Barabanki. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story. 5. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) which was lodged on 04.12.2024 for the alleged incident dated 01.01.2020 without explaining an inordinate delay. Initially the F.I.R. was lodged on the allegation of rape etc. but during the course of investigation no material or evidence, prima-facie, suggesting the offence of rape found. Therefore, the charge-sheet has been filed under Section 69 of B.N.S. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has fairly stated that the present applicant was having cordial relation with the prosecutrix but there was no promise of marriage from his end and if the present applicant is released on bail, both the families may discuss on the issue if the present applicant gets any appropriate job/ appointment. The present applicant is pursuing for competitive examination and presently he is not able to get married. 7. Attention has been drawn towards the second supplementary affidavit, which has been filed today, wherein Annexure No.SA- 1 has been filed, which is a complaint dated 27.11.2024 filed by the father of the present applicant against the mother of the prosecutrix as she had abused the family members of the present applicant and threatened for dire consequences. Though the parties settled their dispute amicably at a Police Station and report to this effect has been filed with the supplementary affidavit. 8. Sri Tiwari has stated that when the complaint dated 27.11.2024 has been settled amicably, the informant having ulterior motives and extraneous design in her mind has filed the impugned F.I.R. on 04.12.2024. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The charge- sheet has been filed. He has undertaken on behalf of the present applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court, and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly. 9. On the other hand, Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate and Sri Jaibind Singh Rathour, learned counsel for the complainant/ informant have strongly opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail, but they could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of learned counsel for the applicant. 10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that there is unexplained inordinate delay in lodging the impugned F.I.R.; the fact that initially the F.I.R. was lodged on the allegation of rape etc. but during the course of investigation no material or evidence, prima-facie, suggesting the offence of rape found; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; the charge-sheet has been filed and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail. 11. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant (Mohammad Nazim) 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 IPC/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 82 Cr.P.C./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 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 IPC/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 313 Cr.P.C./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 in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench