Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12936 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1812 of 2025 Applicant :- Abdul Shakib Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Gupta,Mohd. Arshad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Mohd. Arshad learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ranvijay Singh learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is languishing in jail since 11.12.2024 in Case Crime No.461 of 2024, under Sections 77, 64(2)m, 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short B.N.S), Police Station- Asandra, District- Barabanki. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story. 3. Attention has been drawn towards impugned FIR, which was lodged on 09.12.2024 without indicating actual date of incident. Though, in the FIR it has been indicated that the present applicant established physical relation with her without her consent on the basis of threat showing her obscene video, wherein she is taking bath. However, no such video was found during course of investigation therefore chargesheet has not been filed under Section 67 of the I.T. Act. In the FIR one more allegation has been levelled that such physical relation has been established on the pretext of false promise of marriage, but chargesheet has not been filed under Section 69 of B.N.S. While recording her statements under Section 180 & 183 BNSS, she narrated some different story regarding her pregnancy, inasmuch as, in the FIR no such allegation has been levelled, whereas in her statement under Section 180 BNSS, she has stated that the present applicant provided one medicine which was relating to the pregnancy but in her statement under Section 183 BNSS she stated that she was pregnant and applicant provided medicine to abort the pregnancy. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Charge-sheet has been filed. 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. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant by submitting that the allegation against the present applicant is serious in nature, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail, 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the present applicant established physical relation with her without her consent on the basis of threat showing her obscene video, wherein she is taking bath, however, no such video was found during course of investigation therefore chargesheet has not been filed under Section 67 of the I.T. Act; the statements under Section 180 & 183 BNSS, wherein she narrated some different story regarding her pregnancy, inasmuch as, in the FIR no such allegation has been levelled, whereas in her statement under Section 180 BNSS, she has stated that the present applicant provided one medicine which was relating to the pregnancy but in her statement under Section 183 BNSS she stated that she was pregnant and applicant provided medicine to abort the pregnancy; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; 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 he 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. 7. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant (Abdul Shakib), 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 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 of the Indian Penal Code. (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.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, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (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. 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. (v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench