✦ High Court of India · 12 Sep 2025

State of U.P v. Party

Case Details High Court of India · 12 Sep 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
12 Sep 2025
Bench
SAMIT GOPAL
Length
1,039 words

2. Heard Sri Randhir Jain, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned counsel AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Akhilesh Bharti, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 73 of 2025, under Sections 70(1), 110, 115(2), 351(2), 351(3) BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Sinduriya, District Maharajganj.

4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 18.04.2025 by Brijesh against the applicant and three other persons alleging therein that on 06.04.2025 at about 11:00 pm Akhilesh and Ankit of the village committed rape upon his wife. She resented to the same on which they threatened her. She told about the incident to him on 08.04.2025 when he returned back home. She also told him that they have clicked her nude photos and have threatened her of making it viral. When he went to the house of Ankit to make a complaint on 11.04.2025 at about 07:00 pm he was assaulted due to which he received injuries on his head. Report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that that the victim is a married major woman aged about 28 years. It is submitted that the first informant was medically examined and was found to have received three injuries out of which the injury no.1 was opined to be kept under observation whereas the other injuries were opined to be simple in nature. It is further submitted that in the CT Scan did not find any abnormality there and as such the same is simple in nature. It is submitted that the victim was examined as PW-1 before the trial court who did not support 2 BAIL No. 31309 of 2025 the prosecution case and has exonerated the applicant and co-accused Ankit and has been declared hostile. She stated that they did not come to her house or clicked her photos and did not commit rape upon her. It is submitted that as such the implication of the applicant in the present case is without any credible evidence. It is submitted that the FIR has been lodged after inordinate delay of about 12 days of the incident. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 26 of the affidavit and is in jail since 29.04.2025.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the FIR has been lodged after 12 days of the incident. The injuries received by the first informant were simple in nature. The victim was examined as PW-1 before the trial court who has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. The victim is a married major woman aged about 28 years.

8. 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 applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the applicant Akhilesh Bharti, 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 applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant 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 applicant 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 applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if 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 209 BNS, 2023. 3 BAIL No. 31309 of 2025 (v) The applicant 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 BNSS, 2023. 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

10. 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 applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 12, 2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal,J.) MOHAMMAD ARIF MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Randhir Jain, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned counsel AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Akhilesh Bharti, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 73 of 2025, under Sections 70(1), 110, 115(2), 351(2), 351(3) BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Sinduriya, District Maharajganj.

4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 18.04.2025 by Brijesh against the applicant and three other persons alleging therein that on 06.04.2025 at about 11:00 pm Akhilesh and Ankit of the village committed rape upon his wife. She resented to the same on which they threatened her. She told about the incident to him on 08.04.2025 when he returned back home. She also told him that they have clicked her nude photos and have threatened her of making it viral. When he went to the house of Ankit to make a complaint on 11.04.2025 at about 07:00 pm he was assaulted due to which he received injuries on his head. Report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that that the victim is a married major woman aged about 28 years. It is submitted that the first informant was medically examined and was found to have received three injuries out of which the injury no.1 was opined to be kept under observation whereas the other injuries were opined to be simple in nature. It is further submitted that in the CT Scan did not find any abnormality there and as such the same is simple in nature. It is submitted that the victim was examined as PW-1 before the trial court who did not support 2 BAIL No. 31309 of 2025 the prosecution case and has exonerated the applicant and co-accused Ankit and has been declared hostile. She stated that they did not come to her house or clicked her photos and did not commit rape upon her. It is submitted that as such the implication of the applicant in the present case is without any credible evidence. It is submitted that the FIR has been lodged after inordinate delay of about 12 days of the incident. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 26 of the affidavit and is in jail since 29.04.2025.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the FIR has been lodged after 12 days of the incident. The injuries received by the first informant were simple in nature. The victim was examined as PW-1 before the trial court who has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. The victim is a married major woman aged about 28 years.

8. 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 applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the applicant Akhilesh Bharti, 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 applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant 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 applicant 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 applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if 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 209 BNS, 2023. 3 BAIL No. 31309 of 2025 (v) The applicant 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 BNSS, 2023. 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

10. 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 applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 12, 2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal,J.) MOHAMMAD ARIF MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Find similar cases Start drafting free
This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments