CRLA/2944/2025 of RISHABH TIWARI Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY.HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER on 11 December 2025

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2944 of 2025

Court No. - 28

HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

(Crl. Misc. Application No.02 of 2025)

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate (A.G.A.) for the State.

This Criminal Appeal, filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, challenges the order dated 06.08.2025, passed by the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Sultanpur, rejecting the bail application (No. 2384/2025) of the appellant, Rishabh Tiwari, in connection with Case Crime No. 168 of 2025, under Sections 64, 351(2), 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.) and Section 3(2)(v) of the S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Gosainganj, District Sultanpur.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. The appellant submits that the prosecutrix is aged about 18 years, is a major girl, and was capable of giving consent. The defense submits that the prosecutrix's conduct suggests the relationship was consensual. It is strongly contended that the Medical Examination Report does not corroborate the allegation of sexual assault, specifically noting "no external genital injury seen" and stating that the hymen had an "Old Rupture". Furthermore, it is submitted that the appellant has no previous criminal history and has been in continuous judicial custody since 07.05.2025. The counsel further submitted that if the appellant is enlarged on bail, he will fully cooperate in the trial, will not misuse the liberty of bail, and will not affect the trial or exert any pressure on the evidence or witnesses.

Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, arguing that the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., and while she initially stated she could not recognize the miscreant in the darkness, she later recognized him as Rishu when he was leaving. The learned AGA expressed apprehension that if the applicant is granted bail, he will influence the trial and intimidate the witnesses. The learned

Versus

Counsel for Appellant(s)

:

Kaushal Kishore, Anurag Pratap Singh

Counsel for Respondent(s)

:

G.A.

Rishabh Tiwari

.....Appellant(s)

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Lko. And Another

.....Respondent(s)

AGA, however, concedes that the medical report notes that no external injury was found and that the appellant has no criminal history.

Considering the totality of the circumstances and applying its judicial mind to the material available on record, this Court notes that the victim is aged about 18 years and is a major girl as per the F.I.R., the medical evidence does not corroborate the allegation of sexual assault as "no external genital injury" was found, and the appellant has no criminal history and has been languishing in jail since 07.05.2025; in light of these facts, particularly the contradictory nature of the prosecution story regarding initial identification, the lack of corroboration of the grave allegation of sexual assault in the medical evidence at this stage, the period of incarceration already undergone by the appellant, and the fact that the appeal against the rejection of bail is the statutory right of the appellant, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail, having assured the court that he will cooperate in the trial and will not affect the course of justice.

In view of the above, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 06.08.2025

passed by the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Sultanpur, is set aside.

Let the appellant, Rishabh Tiwari, be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime No. 168 of 2025 on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following additional conditions: