Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:482 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12837 of 2024 Applicant :- Rahul Nishad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Brihaspati Mani Pathak,Arpit Chaudhary,Priyanka Dube Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Heard Shri Arpit Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Rahul Nishad in Case Crime No.264 of 2024, under Sections 376/323 I.P.C., P.S. Purakalandar, District Ayodhya with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 3. In compliance of the order dated 12.12.2024, Shri Mustaq Shah, Sub-Inspector as well as Ms. Khusbu Yadav, Sub- Inspector, P.S. Purakalandar, District Ayodhya are present before this Court along with prosecutrix/victim. 4. The prosecutrix/victim before this Court stated that she is married to Jitendra Kumar and both are living happily under one roof. She also says that the accused/applicant was not willing to marry her at any point of time. 5. This Court considered the aforesaid statement of the prosecutrix/victim as also her statement(s) recorded in terms of Sections 180 and 183 of B.N.S.S. as also the contents of the FIR lodged by prosecutrix/victim as also the observation made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Deepak Gulati vs. State of Haryana (2013) 7 SCC 675; Sonu @ Subhash Kumar vs. State of U.P. and Another (2021) 7 SCC; Mandar Deepak Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another 2022 SCC OnLine SC 2110, Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar vs. State of Maharashtra, (2019) 18 SCC 191; and Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) 9 SCC 608 and upon due consideration of the aforesaid, this Court finds it a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. It is for the reason that story of the prosecution is not intact, and at this stage it could be inferred that on account of non- solemnizing the marriage by the applicant with the victim, the FIR was lodged and the same can be deduced from the following facts. (i) According to FIR on 25.05.2024 at about 11:00 P.M. the victim got separated in crowd from her relatives while she was going to 'fair' and the applicant taking benefit of the same caught/abducted the victim and committed rape with victim in agricultural field and the victim was also brutally assaulted by the applicant. (ii) Before the Investigating Officer (in short, 'I.O.') the victim did not state that she got separated from her relatives in crowd and accordingly the story of abduction, prima facie, appears to be doubtful. (iii) As per the statement(s) of the prosecutrix/victim made before the concerned Magistrate recorded under Section 183 of B.N.S.S., the applicant and prosecutrix/victim were having affair and the period of this affair is of about 5 years and the applicant established physical relations with the consent of the victim and further, at the time of abduction the victim was holding the hand of her brother-in-law and place of crime is about 1/2 hours away and the victim did not oppose nor made hue and cry. (iv) Upon perusal of the medico examination report of the prosecutrix/victim (Annexure 5) indicates that medical examination of the prosecutrix/victim was carried out on 02.08.2024 and as per the same the victim at the time of alleged incident was major aged about 19 years. Upon medical examination, injuries were not found on the body of the victim. 6. Let applicant- Rahul Nishad be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail. (2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court. (3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 7. Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail. 8. As this order relates to enlargement of the applicant on bail, it is clarified that the 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 observations made in this order. Order Date :- 3.1.2025 Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench