Shivam Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ...

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)

:

Ram Milan Yadav, Om Prakash Yadav

Counsel for Respondent(s)

:

G.A.

Court No. - 12

HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent no.1-State.

2. As per CJM report dated 30.03.2026, notice has been served upon respondent No.2, but no one has put in appearance.

3. Despite time having been granted earlier, no objections have been filed on behalf of State.

4. This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14A(2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 with a prayer to set aside order dated 10.02.2026 passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Raebareli on Bail Application arising out of Case Crime No.588 of 2025 under Sections 191(2), 69, 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S. & Sections 3(1)?, ?, 3(2)5 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, P.S. Bachharawan, District - Raebareli refusing bail to appellant. Further, a prayer has been made to enlarge the appellant on bail in the said case crime.

5. As per contents of first information report, the appellant and the informant were in a relationship which was allegedly established on the false pretext of marriage. The narration in First Information Report indicates that the appellant induced the informant to live with him but soon thereafter he started abusing her with caste based insults. It is further alleged that on 15.06.2025 when the appellant was not at home, his brother Shubham allegedly committed rape upon her and when she disclosed the said fact to the other family members of appellant, instead of helping her they also abused her. It is further alleged that subsequently, the informant intimated about the said incident to the appellant, who also did not support her but thereafter, they started living separately from the family. Allegation levelled is that despite the said factors, appellant continuously sexually exploited the informant without marriage.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against him which could be evident from the fact that in the statements recorded under Section 180/183 BNSS the victim admits that two were in a relationship for two years prior to the date of incident. It is therefore submitted that the present case is only of breach of promise as distinct from false promise from the very inception. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana reported in (2013) 7 SCC 675. It is further submitted that only general allegations of caste based insults have been made without any specific insults having been adequate and therefore, the provisions of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, would not be applicable. It is submitted that appellant without any previous criminal history is under incarceration since 13.12.2025.

7. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the appeal with submission that statement of informant recorded under Sections 180/183 BNSS clearly corroborate the allegations levelled in the First Information Report. It is however admitted that appellant does not have any previous criminal history.

8. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that in the statement of informant recorded under Section 183 BNSS, it has been admitted that parties were in relationship for the past two years. The aspect of whether sexual exploitation is due to breach of promise or false promise to marry from very inception will require to be adjudicated upon by trial court with evidence. The aspects of rape also do not appear to be corroborated by the medical report. The appellant without previous criminal history is under incarceration since 13.12.2025.

9. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, without commenting on merits, I am of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. The order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 10.02.2026 is set aside.

10. Let appellant/applicant Shivam Yadav involved in aforesaid case 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii) The applicant 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 otherwise tamper with the evidence.

(iv) 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. 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 appropriate orders in accordance with law.

(v) The applicant 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 (now Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023).

(vi) 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. (bow Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code (now Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023).

11. The pending application if any too stands disposed of.

(Manish Mathur,J.)

May 7, 2026

lakshman