In the case of Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P. and another

2. Heard Sri Shashi Kant Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Chandra Prakash Mishra, holding brief of Sri Kartikeya Shukla, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 116 of 2023, under Sections 376, 452, 328, 504, 506 IPC and Section 67 of I.T. Act, Police Station Dakor, District Jalaun, during the pendency of trial.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was granted interim bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.11.2023 and the following order was passed :- " Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Kartikeya Shukla, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State. There are allegations against the applicant of committing the offences of rape, intoxication, criminal intimidation, etc., after entering into the house of victim. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication after 8 months of the incident. He has submitted that the victim is major and was having consenting relationship with the applicant which later went sour and false implication of the applicant was made. No obscene video of the victim was made viral. The photographs and video recording were mutually exchanged during good times. It is case of false implication of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 08.08.2023 and has criminal history of three cases. Counsel for the informant, Sri Kartikeya Shukla, has opposed the submission and has prayed for time to file counter affidavit. He is granted three week's time to file counter affidavit. Counsel for the applicant is also granted two week's time to file rejoinder affidavit. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant, Devanshu Gupta, be involved in Case Crime No. 116 of 2023, under Sections- 376, 452, 328, 504, 506 IPC and Section 67 of I.T. Act, Police Station- Dakor, District- Jalaun, be released on interim bail till the next date fixed on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) 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 interim bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of interim bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates 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 interim bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of interim bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Put up this case as a fresh case on 09.01.2024. In failure to comply this order, the interim bail granted to the applicant shall stand cancelled and he shall be taken into custody forthwith."

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. It is next stated that the applicant has not misused the said interim bail granted to him.

6. Learned counsel has also stated that photographs purported to have been posted on the Instagram by the applicant were not posted on social media, rather they are stated to have been exchanged between the applicant and the victim and the same have been misused by the informant.

7. Learned counsel has next stated that even the said photograph posted as d.p. of the applicant on his Instagram i.d. is not indecent. The applicant and victim have been shown as husband and wife in it. The applicant and the victim/informant had married and a notarial document was prepared to the said effect and even the applicant filed a petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and subsequent to it, the trail of FIRs started.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on several chats between the applicant and the victim. The said mobile number of the victim is mentioned in the FIR itself which indicates that the the victim demanded ransom amount of Rs.10 lacs from the applicant.

9. Learned counsel has further stated that during trial, four witnesses have been examined. The victim has been examined as PW-1 and there remains nothing subsequent to it. There is no likelihood of the applicant tempering with the evidence. The applicant is not a flight risk.

10. The criminal history of four cases assigned to him has been explained as he has been enlarged on bail in all those cases and three of those cases have been foisted by the informant out of vengeance. The applicant is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on regular bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail as he has not misused the interim bail granted earlier on.

11. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the said indecent photographs have been posted by the applicant on every social media platform and he has not even left any relative of the victim to whom he has not sent the said indecent photographs. The applicant has maligned the victim in the society at large, as such he is not entitled for bail.

12. This Court had called for status of trial on 03.07.2025 and the said report received from the trial court dated 21.07.2025 indicates that four witness have been examined to date, out of which three witnesses are the fact witnesses and the fourth witness is a lady constable.

13. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail.

14. The well-known principle of "Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty," gives rise to the concept of bail as a rule and imprisonment as an exception.

15. A person's right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because the person is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no one's life or personal liberty may be taken away unless the procedure established by law is followed, and the procedure must be just and reasonable. The said principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690.

16. Reiterating the aforesaid view, the Supreme Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595, has again emphasized that the very well-settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment is not to be forgotten. It is high time that the Courts should recognize the principle that "bail is a rule and jail is an exception".

17. The Supreme Court in Jalaluddin Khan Vs. Union of India, reported in (2024) 10 SCC 574, held that 'bail is the rule, jail is the exception' even in special statute like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

18. Learned A.G.A. could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.

19. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned A.G.A.

20. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the said d.p. used on the i.d. does not seem to be indecent, although there are several indecent photographs filed by learned A.G.A. as per compliance certificate, the earlier order of this Court dated 24.11.2023 is made absolute. The present bail application is, accordingly, allowed.

21. Let the applicant- Devanshu Gupta, who is involved in aforementioned case crime, be released on regular bail on the same personal bond and sureties, if already furnished, subject to the conditions enumerated in the earlier order of this Court dated 24.11.2023.

22. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned in the earlier order of this Court dated 24.11.2023, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

23. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 5.8.2025 Sumit S SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Justice Krishan Pahal)

2. Heard Sri Shashi Kant Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Chandra Prakash Mishra, holding brief of Sri Kartikeya Shukla, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 116 of 2023, under Sections 376, 452, 328, 504, 506 IPC and Section 67 of I.T. Act, Police Station Dakor, District Jalaun, during the pendency of trial.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was granted interim bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.11.2023 and the following order was passed :- " Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Kartikeya Shukla, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State. There are allegations against the applicant of committing the offences of rape, intoxication, criminal intimidation, etc., after entering into the house of victim. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication after 8 months of the incident. He has submitted that the victim is major and was having consenting relationship with the applicant which later went sour and false implication of the applicant was made. No obscene video of the victim was made viral. The photographs and video recording were mutually exchanged during good times. It is case of false implication of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 08.08.2023 and has criminal history of three cases. Counsel for the informant, Sri Kartikeya Shukla, has opposed the submission and has prayed for time to file counter affidavit. He is granted three week's time to file counter affidavit. Counsel for the applicant is also granted two week's time to file rejoinder affidavit. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant, Devanshu Gupta, be involved in Case Crime No. 116 of 2023, under Sections- 376, 452, 328, 504, 506 IPC and Section 67 of I.T. Act, Police Station- Dakor, District- Jalaun, be released on interim bail till the next date fixed on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) 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 interim bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of interim bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates 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 interim bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of interim bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Put up this case as a fresh case on 09.01.2024. In failure to comply this order, the interim bail granted to the applicant shall stand cancelled and he shall be taken into custody forthwith."

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. It is next stated that the applicant has not misused the said interim bail granted to him.

6. Learned counsel has also stated that photographs purported to have been posted on the Instagram by the applicant were not posted on social media, rather they are stated to have been exchanged between the applicant and the victim and the same have been misused by the informant.

7. Learned counsel has next stated that even the said photograph posted as d.p. of the applicant on his Instagram i.d. is not indecent. The applicant and victim have been shown as husband and wife in it. The applicant and the victim/informant had married and a notarial document was prepared to the said effect and even the applicant filed a petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and subsequent to it, the trail of FIRs started.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on several chats between the applicant and the victim. The said mobile number of the victim is mentioned in the FIR itself which indicates that the the victim demanded ransom amount of Rs.10 lacs from the applicant.

9. Learned counsel has further stated that during trial, four witnesses have been examined. The victim has been examined as PW-1 and there remains nothing subsequent to it. There is no likelihood of the applicant tempering with the evidence. The applicant is not a flight risk.

10. The criminal history of four cases assigned to him has been explained as he has been enlarged on bail in all those cases and three of those cases have been foisted by the informant out of vengeance. The applicant is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on regular bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail as he has not misused the interim bail granted earlier on.

11. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the said indecent photographs have been posted by the applicant on every social media platform and he has not even left any relative of the victim to whom he has not sent the said indecent photographs. The applicant has maligned the victim in the society at large, as such he is not entitled for bail.

12. This Court had called for status of trial on 03.07.2025 and the said report received from the trial court dated 21.07.2025 indicates that four witness have been examined to date, out of which three witnesses are the fact witnesses and the fourth witness is a lady constable.

13. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail.

14. The well-known principle of "Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty," gives rise to the concept of bail as a rule and imprisonment as an exception.

15. A person's right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because the person is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no one's life or personal liberty may be taken away unless the procedure established by law is followed, and the procedure must be just and reasonable. The said principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690.

16. Reiterating the aforesaid view, the Supreme Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595, has again emphasized that the very well-settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment is not to be forgotten. It is high time that the Courts should recognize the principle that "bail is a rule and jail is an exception".

17. The Supreme Court in Jalaluddin Khan Vs. Union of India, reported in (2024) 10 SCC 574, held that 'bail is the rule, jail is the exception' even in special statute like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

18. Learned A.G.A. could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.

19. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned A.G.A.

20. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the said d.p. used on the i.d. does not seem to be indecent, although there are several indecent photographs filed by learned A.G.A. as per compliance certificate, the earlier order of this Court dated 24.11.2023 is made absolute. The present bail application is, accordingly, allowed.

21. Let the applicant- Devanshu Gupta, who is involved in aforementioned case crime, be released on regular bail on the same personal bond and sureties, if already furnished, subject to the conditions enumerated in the earlier order of this Court dated 24.11.2023.

22. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned in the earlier order of this Court dated 24.11.2023, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

23. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 5.8.2025 Sumit S SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Justice Krishan Pahal)