NEM SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                  CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9938 of 2026

Nem Singh
                                                                .....Appellant(s)
                                   Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                              .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)            :   Jitendra Singh, Vinai Shanker Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)           :   G.A.

Court No. - 76
                        HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Prabhat
Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Ajay Singh,
learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the record.

3. The Vakalatnama of Sri Prabhat Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite
party no.2 filed yesterday i.e. 29.09.2026 in the office is not on record.
Office to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the
order-sheet about it.

4. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the
appellant- Nem Singh, with the prayer to set aside the order dated
30.06.2026 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST Act, Moradabad in Bail
Application No. 1796 / 2026 (Nem Singh Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of
Case Crime No. 92 of 2026, under Sections 69, 115(2), 126(2), 191(2),
351(3), 352 B.N.S. and Section 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha, 3(2)(5), 3(2)5A S.C./S.T.
Act, Police Station Kundarki, District Moradabad, with a further prayer to
release the appellant on bail in the aforesaid case during the pendency of
trial.

5. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on
23.04.2026 by the victim against the appellant and 06 other persons alleging
therein that Nem Singh is a person of her village and she used to talk to him
since the last 2 1/2 years. He made a false promise to marry with her and
established physical relationship and committed rape upon her many times.
Whenever she used to talk to him for marriage he used to avoid it but now
                                                          CRLA No. 9938 of 2026
                                 2


has refused marrying her and has threatened her of life. He has clicked her
objectionable photographs and made video and threatens her of making it
viral. She became pregnant for two months after which he gave her some
medicines due to which the said pregnancy was aborted. On 20.04.2026 at
about 7.00 pm when she was going to her house all the accused surrounded
her and abused her and assaulted her. She received injures. Nem Singh tried
to take her to his room due to which she is terrified. The accused are making
her video and photograph viral with an intention to cause disrepute to her. A
report be lodged and action be taken.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the victim is a
major woman aged about 30 years. It is submitted that the relationship
between the appellant and the victim was a consensual relationship. It is
submitted that although in the medical examination of the victim conducted
on 24.04.2026 she was found to have received three injuries on her person
but the injuries were opined to about 3-4 days old and were simple in
nature. While placing paragraph 23 of the affidavit it is submitted that no
such video or photograph has been recovered during investigation even after
filing of charge-sheet. The appellant has no criminal history as stated in para
33 of the affidavit and is in jail since 10.05.2026.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned
counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. Learned
counsel for the opposite party no.2 / victim / first informant submitted that
the appellant and the victim had even gone to a hotel which is fortified from
the statement of Ishaq a hotel employee and were present in a room which
would go to show that the appellant had lured her and committed rape upon
her. It is submitted that even the prosecution version is fortified from the
injuries as found by the doctor during the medical examination of the victim
which were opined to be 3-4 days old which also corroborates with the
version of the prosecution. It is submitted that the present case is also a case
under the SC/ST Act in as much as the appellant was a resident of the same
village as that of victim and was very well aware of the fact that the victim
belonged to downtrodden society being SC/ST but still knowing of the same
he committed the said act. It is submitted that the prayer for bail be rejected.

8. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record,
it is evident that the victim is a major woman aged about 30 years. The
                                                            CRLA No. 9938 of 2026
                                  3


investigation in the matter has concluded and charge-sheet has been
submitted. No such alleged video or photograph has been recovered during
the investigation. The relationship between the appellant and the victim was
since the last 2 1/2 years on some discussion of marriage which could not
materialize.

9. 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 appellant may
be enlarged on bail.

10. Let the appellant- Nem Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case
crime number on 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not
harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

(ii) The appellant 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 appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 appellant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner
whatsoever. In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and
in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023
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, in accordance with law, under section 209 B.N.S., 2023.

(v) 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 351 B.N.S.S., 2023. 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 him in accordance with law and the trial
                                                                                               CRLA No. 9938 of 2026
                                                                     4


                                    court may proceed against him under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023.

                                    (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to
                                    conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the appellant.

                                    11. 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
                                    appellant to prison.

                                    12. Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed.

                                    13. The impugned order dated 30.06.2026 passed by the Special Judge
                                    SC/ST Act, Moradabad of the aforesaid case is hereby set aside.

                                    14. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

                                    September 30, 2026
                                    AS Rathore
                                                                                                    (Samit Gopal,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad