Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46322 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7398 of 2025 Applicant :- Umesh Saroj Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. The Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Atiya Abid Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Onkar Nath Singh Advocate on behalf of the complainant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.0093 of 2025 under Section 64, 352, 351(2), 333, 127(2) BNS, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Pratapgarh. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 17.04.2025 at around 4:00 p.m., while the victim was alone at her residence, the applicant, Umesh Saroj, who resides opposite the victim’s house, entered the premises and committed rape upon her. It is further alleged that the victim's father had locked the door from outside, thereby preventing her from escaping. It is also alleged that the applicant and his father threatened the victim. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the prosecution story is highly improbable. The victim, who is a married woman and mother of two children, has alleged that the applicant committed rape upon her in the presence of her father-in-law and mother-in-law, and with their active support. In her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, the victim has made certain improvements. It is further submitted that there is a lack of corroborative material in the medical examination report. The victim is 26 years of age. As per her own statement, at the time of the alleged incident, her two sons were present in the room one was sleeping while the other was playing. The applicant is in judicial custody since 27.4.2025. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the facts mentioned above. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the applicant is in jail since 27.04.2025; he has explained the criminal history of three cases in paragraph 25 of the bail application; there is a delay of nine days in lodging the FIR; the prosecution story appears to be highly improbable and is not supported by any corroborative medical evidence; the children of the victim, who were allegedly present in the room at the time of the incident, have not been interrogated by the Investigating Officer; and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Umesh Saroj be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant 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. (iv) 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. (v) 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 IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) 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. (now Section 84 BNSS)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 of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS). Order Date :- 8.8.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench