Allahabad High Court
Rajnath Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 27 August, 2025
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:149522 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19215 of 2025 With CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18990 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Surya Pratap Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State in both the matters and perused the material on record.
3. These two bail applications are of co-accused which are connected together and are being decided together by a common order.
4. The Bail Application No. 19215 of 2025 under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Rajnath Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 28 of 2025, under Sections 376-DA, 506 I.P.C. & Section 5G/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Dokati, District Ballia.
5. The Bail Application No. 18990 of 2025 under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Munna Yadav @ Sanjeet Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 28 of 2025, under Sections 376-DA, 386, 328 I.P.C. & Section 5G/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Dokati, District Ballia.
6. The first information report of the present matters was lodged on 19.02.2025 by Dhananjay Kumar Prasad against the applicants and one unknown person alleging therein that on 18.0.2025 at about 6 pm his niece went from the house taking her mobile phone. He has suspicion that the accused persons have lured and enticed her away. While going away from the house she has taken her High School marksheet, Aadhar card and Rs. 3500/- with her. She is aged about 17 years. A report be lodged and action be taken.
7. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the victim during investigation has stated in her statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. that she used to talk to Rajnath Yadav on Instagram. Later on she got familiar with his friends Munna Yadav @ Sanjeet Yadav and Shiva Yadav. All the three persons established physical relationship with her and made a video of it and were blackmailing her and asked money from her. They used to take jewellery and money from her as a result of which she gave Rs.20,000/- to Munna Yadav in hand and Rs.10,000/- to Shivam by depositing it in his account. When she refused giving money they threatened her of throwing acid on her. On 18.02.2025 while being disturbed she was going to commit suicide wherein she was apprehended. It is submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. states that she knows Rajnath Yadav since 2021. Rajnath Yadav was not having love affair with her. He on alluring her gave her some intoxicating substance and then established physical relationship with her on 10.02.2021. Munna Yadav and Shiva Yadav his friends were also with him. All the three accused persons made a video of the incident. They were demanding Rs. Two lakhs and jewellery. She on 18.02.2025 was going to commit suicide and was apprehended. It is submitted that the prosecution story is false and concocted. It is submitted that in so far as allegation of sexual assault is concerned, the same is stated to be on 10.02.2021 but there was no immediate complaint either by the victim or by her parents & family members. It was for the first time on 19.02.2025 which is after about 04 years that the present first information report has been lodged levelling such allegations. It is submitted that no such video or photo has been recovered by the police during investigation.
8. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the personal affidavit of the Superintendent of Police, Ballia was called for by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court which has been filed as dated 13.07.2025 in which in paragraph 08 it is averred that despite efforts by the Investigating Officer the alleged incriminating video or photographs of the victim were not recovered from the informant. He showed his inability to provide the same. It is submitted that as such there is no recovery of any such incriminating video or photograph during investigation. It is submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and charge-sheet has been submitted. The applicant Rajnath Yadav has no criminal history as stated in para 28 of the affidavit and the applicant Munna Yadav @ Sanjeet Yadav has also no criminal history as stated in para 30 of the affidavit and they are in jail since 18.03.2025.
9. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim was raped by the accused Rajnath Yadav on 19.02.2021 and since then she was being blackmailed and in a state of harassment & tension she was about to commit suicide wherein she was apprehended. It is submitted that the applicants are named in the first information report and there are allegations against them.
10. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that in response to order dated 03.06.2025 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the bail application of Rajnath Yadav, the personal affidavit of the Superintendent of Police, Ballia dated 13.07.2025 is on record in paragraph 8 of which it is stated that no such video or photograph of the victim being incriminating in nature has been recovered during investigation. The allegation of rape as levelled by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. against the accused Rajnath Yadav is of 10.02.2021. The first information report has been lodged after about 04 years of the said alleged incident. No such video has been recovered.
11. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicants may be enlarged on bail.
12. Let the applicants- Rajnath Yadav and Munna Yadav @ Sanjeet Yadav, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two suretieseach 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 applicants will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicants will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.
(iv) The applicants will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(v) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicants.
13. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicants to prison.
14. The bail application is allowed.
15. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
August 27, 2025 AS Rathore