Allahabad High Court
Ankit Awasthi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 23 July, 2025
Author: Saurabh Lavania
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42325
Court No. - 13
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 982 of 2025
Appellant :- Ankit Awasthi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Dilip Kumar Pandey,Praveen Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. Case called out.
2. Considering the Office Report dated 02.05.2025 as also Annexure No. 1 of Counter Affidavit filed by the State with a proof of service of notice upon respondent no. 2, this Court finds that service of notice upon the respondent no. 2 is sufficient. However, no one appeared on behalf of the respondent no. 2 to oppose the present appeal. In this view of the matter, this Court proceeded to hear the instant appeal.
3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.
4. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 12.03.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hardoi in Bail Application No. 566 of 2025, arising out of F.I.R/ Case Crime No. 34 of 2025, under Sections - 376, 504, 506 I.P.C., and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(v)A of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kachhauna, District- Hardoi.
5. While pressing the present appeal, it is stated that the victim, aged about 24 years, a married lady and teacher of a primary school at Samaspur, lodged an FIR No. 34 of 2025, under Sections - 376, 504, 506 I.P.C., and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(v)A of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kachhauna, District- Hardoi against the appellant and after lodging of the FIR, the appellant, who has no criminal history which has not been disputed, was apprehended and sent to jail and since 09.02.2025, he is in jail.
6. It is further stated that respondent no.2/victim/informant in the FIR levelled allegations against the appellant to the effect that the appellant established physical relations after giving assurance to solemnize marriage and if the said allegations are taken on its face value then in that eventuality the chances of conviction, in view of the various pronouncements of Hon'ble Apex Court including 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; and Mandar Deepak Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another 2022 SCC OnLine SC 2110, are extremely bleak.
7. It is further stated that respondent no.2/victim/informant is a married lady and out of the wedlock, she is having two daughters and therefore, also, the allegations levelled in the FIR are baseless
8. He lastly submitted that all the aforesaid aspects of the case were not considered by the trial court, as such, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and the appellant be enlarged on bail.
9. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of counsel for the appellant.
10. Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and all the relevant documents placed on record.
11. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A., F.I.R., impugned order, as also the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments, referred above, including that the appellant is in jail since 09.02.2025 and has no criminal history as also the submissions regarding physical relations as also the chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed.
12. The impugned order dated 12.03.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hardoi in Bail Application No. 566 of 2025, arising out of F.I.R/ Case Crime No. 34 of 2025, under Sections - 376, 504, 506 I.P.C., and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(v)A of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kachhauna, District- Hardoi is hereby set aside.
13. Let appellant- Ankit Awasthi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :-
(i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial.
(ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial.
(iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s).
(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 shall 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.
14. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law
15. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) 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(s) made in this order.
Order Date :- 23.7.2025
Mohit Singh/-
