HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2257 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard. 2. By means of instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 17.06.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 215 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 242 of 2025 under Sections 87, 64(1) and 351(2) and Sections 3(1) Da, 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Kotwali Sadar, District- Lakhimpur Kheri. 3. It is stated that if the case of prosecution is taken on its face value, then in that eventuality, it can be inferred that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. 4. It is also stated that according to the FIR in issue, the basis of pending criminal proceedings, lodged on 17.03.2025, the appellant enticed away the 19 years old daughter of the informant. The story indicated in the FIR is completely false and concocted and if it is taken to be true in that eventuality it is apparent that it is a case of consent as victim, at the time alleged incident, was 19 years old, on her own volition accepted the company of the appellant and even went to Delhi, which could be deduced from a perusal of the statement(s) of victim recorded in terms of Sections 180 and 183 BNSS 2023. The physical relations, if any, established between the victim and appellant were on her consent. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sumit Chauhan, Manish Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Ajeet Kumar Singh, Saurabh Verma Nasrat Ali .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. It is also stated that under the pressure of family members, the victim levelled the allegations to attract the offence under under Section 64(1) BNS 2023, akin to Section 376 IPC (now repealed). It is for the reason that a perusal of the said statement(s) would indicate that specific date of commission of crime for the first time has not been indicated. 6. It is also stated that medical opinion also does not support the story of the prosecution as upon due examination Doctor concerned found no injury either internal or external and therefore he opined that "there are no sign of use of force; sexual violence cannot be ruled out." and further, FSL report is not available with the prosecution. 7. Thus, taking note of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also that the appellant is in incarceration since 24.05.2025, indulgence of this Court is required in the matter and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. 8. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the applicant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel. 9. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., medical report as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation. 10. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances including the statement(s) of the victim and contents of the FIR as also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed. 11. The order dated 17.06.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 215 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 242 of 2025 under Sections 87, 64(1) and 351(2) and Sections 3(1) Da, 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Kotwali Sadar, District-Lakhimpur Kheri, is hereby set aside. 12. Let appellant-Nasrat Ali be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned CRLA No. 2257 of 2025 2 subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 13. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. September 23, 2025 Vinay/- CRLA No. 2257 of 2025 3 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench