Allahabad High Court
Lalluram vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 26 June, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36565
Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5689 of 2025
Applicant :- Lalluram
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Bhoopal Singh,Surya Vijay Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
It has been informed by the learned A.G.A. for the State that notice has been served upon the opposite party no.2 on 14.6.2025 but neither the opposite party no.2 nor his counsel is present before this Court.
In the light of the Judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Junaid Vs. State of U.P. reported in (2021) SCC Online All 463, the service of notice is sufficient.
Since the matter pertains to life and liberty of the applicant, therefore, this Court is proceeding to hear the present matter.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.31 of 2025, under Section 137(2), 87, 64(1) of B.N.S. 2023 and Section 5(j)(ii)/6 POCSO Act, P.S.-Kheri, District - Lakhimpur Kheri.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that age of the alleged victim was more than 18 years at the time of incident and the statement of the victim demolishes the story of the prosecution as she stated that she was fallen in love with the applicant and was willing to marry with him and now she has performed marriage. He next submitted that due to annoyance, the father has lodged the F.I.R. though in the light of the statement of the victim, who is major, the matter would not lead to the punishment. He also submitted that the charge sheet has been filed, as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidence and threaten the witnesses. Further submission is that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 19 of the bail application and the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.3.2025 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate in the trial proceedings.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the aforesaid offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires thatage of the alleged victim was more than 18 years at the time of incident; the statement of the victim demolishes the story of the prosecution as she stated that she was fallen in love with the applicant and was willing to marry with him and now she has performed marriage; the charge sheet has been filed, as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidence and threaten the witnesses; there is no previous criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 19 of the bail application; the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.3.2025 and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if granted and would co-operate in the trial proceedings.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant Lalluram involved in the aforementioned 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:-
(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;
(2) 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. He 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;
(3) 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.; and
(4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.
Order Date :- 26.6.2025
Ram Murti
