Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11490 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1620 of 2025 Applicant :- Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- O.P. Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1.Heard Sri O.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Alok Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Pratap Singh) is languishing in jail since 16.01.2025 in FIR/Case Crime No.373 of 2023, under Sections 323, 324, 376- D, 354 & 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Bangarmau, District-Unnao. 3. 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. 4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) wherein no allegation has been levelled against the present applicant. As a matter of fact, the present applicant has not been implicated as an accused in the aforesaid case, as allegation has been levelled against three accused persons. There is a case where while recording the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the allegation has been levelled against the present applicant along with other accused persons but while recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she did not level any allegation against the present applicant. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that as per the prosecution story, pursuant to one earlier F.I.R. registered under Section 376 I.P.C., she has been given security and the offence in question could have not been committed in the presence of the security personnel. Besides, the name of one co-accused, Saroj, against whom the allegation was levelled, has been deleted from the charge-sheet. As per the C.D.R., on the date of incident in question the present applicant was present at Delhi, it has been indicated in Parcha No.29 of the Case Diary, but Sri Alok Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate has stated on the basis of Parcha No.44 of the Case Diary, that the location of the present applicant was found at the place of incident. Notably, the aforesaid fact may be tested during the course of trial. 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. 6. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has 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 he could not dispute the aforesaid factual contention of learned counsel for the applica 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that in the F.I.R. no allegation has been levelled against the present applicant; there is contradiction in the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C.; 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. 8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant (Pratap Singh) 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 :- 24.2.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench