Shamim Ahmed, J.

1. Counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit filed by the learned AGA and learned counsel for the applicant respectively are taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Suresh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

3. By means of the present bail application, the applicant- Anuj Kumar Singh Alias Kalia seeks bail in Case Crime No. 408 of 2022, under Sections 376,452,504,506 IPC, Police Station Ram Sanehi Ghat, District Barabanki during the pendency of trial.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. No such incident as alleged by the prosecution took place. The entire prosecution story is lodged with the intention to defame the image of the applicant and his entire family in the society.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that before lodging of the present FIR there was dispute between the applicant and victimcomplainant regarding pathway as the pathway was illegally obstructed by the husband of the complainant, for which the brother of the applicant namely Anupam Kumar Singh has called the police by Dialing 112 number and thereafter the police reached and removed the said illegal encroachment of the complainant’s husband made on the pathway. Being annoyed from the said incident, the husband of the victim-complainant tried to assault the applicant and his brother. Therefore, the police has challaned the husband of the complainant namely Ramraj and two others persons under sections 107/116/151 Cr.P.C. on 04- 07-2022. The chalani report is filed as Annexure No.5 to this bail application.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that being aggrieved by the alleged action, the husband of the complainant got annoyed and put forward his wife (the complainant) for lodging the present FIR dated 20.07.2022 regarding the incident dated 18-07-2022.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the allegation of rape made by the victimcomplainant against the applicant is false as the applicant had never entered the house of the victim nor committed rape upon her. The victim has given the statements under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. on the pressure created by her husband and made allegation of rape against the applicant only with the intention to falsely implicate him in the present case due to the reason that a case under sections 107/116/151 Cr.P.C. was lodged against the husband of the victim-complainant namely Ramraj and two other persons regarding the incident dated 04-07-2022, which shows malicious intention of the prosecution.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the entire allegation as levelled by the victimcomplainant in her statements recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and the version of FIR regarding commission of rape got demolished as once the victim has refused to get her medical examination conducted. Thus, in absence of medical examination report, it cannot be said that rape has been committed by the applicant. The victim is a married lady having two sons aged about 35 years. Thus she is major and knew her consequences very well.

9. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. The applicant undertakes that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 21.7.2022 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

10. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

11. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, considering the fact that the allegation of rape as levelled by the victim-complainant in her statement recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.and the version of FIR got demolished as once she has refused to get her medical examination conducted and in absence of any medical examination report, it cannot be said that rape has been committed, therefore, malicious intention appears to be correct as the husband of the victim-complainant was already challaned under sections 107/116/151 Cr.P.C. on 04-07-2022 and the present FIR has been lodged regarding the incident dated 18-07- 2022 on 20-07-2022 after the above incident of civil dispute; the victim-complainant is a married lady having two sons aged about 35 years, thus she is major, she knew her consequences very well. It appears that under the pressure created by her husband, the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case and further considering the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, [LQ/SC/2018/152] this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

12. The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

13. Let the applicant Anuj Kumar Singh Alias Kalia involved in Case Crime No. 408 of 2022, under Sections 376,452,504,506 IPC, Police Station Ram Sanehi Ghat, District Barabanki be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-

(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.

(3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

(4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

(5) 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, then the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(6) The applicant shall remain present in person, before the trial court on the date fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant 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 him in accordance with law.

(7) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

(8) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

14. It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of the applicant's bail.

15. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.