Allahabad High Court
Ramjan Ali vs State Of U.P. And Another on 30 June, 2025
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:100662
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 509 of 2025
Appellant :- Ramjan Ali
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Anurag Rai,Shyamu Shukla
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Shyamu Shukla, the learned counsel for appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party no.1.
2. Perused the record.
3. Learned AGA informs that notice of this appeal has already been served upon first informant-opposite party no.2 on 23.01.2025. However, in spite of service of notice neither any counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of first informant-opposite party no.2 nor any-one has put in appearance on her behalf to oppose this appeal even in revised call.
4. Appellant Ramjan Ali has approached this Court by means of this appeal seeking his enlargement on bail in case crime no.440 of 2024, under Sections 115 (2), 351 (3), 74, 78, 64 (1) B.N.S. and Section 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act, Police Station-Pipiganj, District Gorakhpur.
5. Learned counsel for appellant submits that the FIR dated 01.10.2024 giving rise to the present appeal was lodged by the mother of the prosecutrix and was registered as case crime no.0440 of 2024, under Sections 115 (2), 351 (3), 74 and 78 B.N.S., 2023. However, no allegation regarding commission of rape upon the prosecutrix was made in the FIR. After aforementioned FIR was lodged then the statements of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 180 BNSS, wherein also no allegation regarding commission of rape upon her was made. Subsequently, in her statement under Section 183 BNSS the prosecutrix has alleged that her modesty was deliberately and forcibly dislodged by appellant by committing rape upon her.
6. On the above premise, the learned counsel for appellant contends that the prosecutrix has improved upon the prosecution story in her subsequent statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
7. He further submits that though FIR is not the encyclopedia of the prosecution case yet it does decide the basic prosecution case. The prosecutrix in her statement under Section 183 BNSS, therefore, suffers from the voice of embarrassment, exaggeration and consultation.
8. Even otherwise, appellant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as, he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Appellant is in jail since 04.10.2024. As such, he has undergone more than seven and a half months. The charge sheet/police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. As such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against appellant stands crystallized. However, up to this stage, no such circumstance has emerged on record necessitating the custodial arrest of appellant during the pendency of trial. On the above premise, the learned counsel for appellant submits that appellant is liable to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of trial. In case, the appellant is enlarged on bail then in that eventuality, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.
9. Per contra the learned AGA representing the State-opposite party no.1 has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
10. Learned AGA submits that since the appellant is a named and charge-sheeted accused therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. The prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which was recorded before the Magistrate has clearly implicated the appellant in the crime in the case.
11. He therefore, submits that appellant has not deserve any indulgence by this Court of his complaint against appellant is not only illegal but also immoral. Appellant is guilty of dislodging the modesty of the prosecutrix forcibly and deliberately. However, he could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for appellant in support of the present appeal for bail with reference to the record at this stage.
12. Having heard, the learned counsel for appellant, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1, upon perusal of record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence, accusations made, complicity of accused this Court finds that the appellant is a named and charge sheeted accused, however in the FIR giving rise to the present criminal proceedings no allegation for committing rape upon the prosecutrix was levelled against the appellant, for the first time, the prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has made allegations regarding commission of rape upon her by appellant as such the prosecutrix in her subsequent statements referred to above has improved upon not only the prosecution story as well as in the FIR but has departed from her previous statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. As such the statement of the prosecutrix recorded subsequently under Section 164 Cr.P.C. suffers from the voice of embarrassment, contradiction and exaggeration, the police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. having already been submitted, therefore, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against appellant stands crystallized, yet in spite of above, the learned A.G.A. could not point out any such circumstance from the record necessitating the custodial arrest of appellant during the pendency of trial, the judgment of Supreme Court in Sumit Subhashchandra Gangwal Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 373 (Paragraph 5), the clean antecedents of appellant inasmuch as appellant has no criminal history to his credit except the present one, the period of incarceration undergone, therefore, irrespective of the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 in opposition to the present application for bail, but without making any comments on the merits of the case, appellant has made out a case for bail.
13. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed.
14. Let the appellant- Ramjan Ali, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) THE APPELLANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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.
(ii) THE APPELLANT-APPELLANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPELLANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPELLANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPELLANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPELLANT IS DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPELLANT.
15. However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the appellant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 30.6.2025
Neeraj
