Allahabad High Court
BINTU KASHYAP @ TUINYAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that bail is appropriate and granted it subject to conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Bintu Kashyap @ Tuinya, who was arrested in a case involving offences under IPC Section 333, BNS Section 74 and Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed innocence, alleging false implication and cited a prior FIR he lodged against the first informant for alleged sexual harassment. The State opposed bail, noting the seriousness of the charges and that a notice had been served on the first informant. After reviewing the record, the Court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, found the case suitable for bail and ordered release on a personal bond with two sureties and several conditions to prevent tampering or intimidation of witnesses. The order expressly limited its effect to the bail application and did not prejudice the trial court’s independent assessment of the evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita for offences under IPC Section 333, BNS Section 74 and POCSO Sections 7/8.
- Whether the applicant’s alleged false implication and prior criminal history justify denial of bail.
- Whether the risk of evidence tampering or witness intimidation warrants refusal of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 74
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Indian Penal Code — s. 333
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 7, 8
Subjects
- bail
- sexual harassment
- POCSO
- false implication
- criminal history
- court conditions
- Section 483 B.N.S.S.
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14576 of 2026
Bintu Kashyap @ Tuinya
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pratibha Vohra, Rajesh Bohra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Miss Pratibha Vohra,, learned counsel for the applicant
and Sri Ashish Kumar Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-
respondents and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of
applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 07
of 2026, under Sections 333, 74 BNS and Section 7/8 of POCSO
Act, registered at Police Station Chandausi, District Sambhal,
during pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that
applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this
case and he has been languishing in jail since 16.3.2026. It is
further submitted that present case is a counterblast to the earlier
case lodged by the applicant against the first informant being Case
Crime No. 555 of 2025 dated 20.12.2025. It is further submitted
that general allegation of sexual harassement has been levelled
against the applicant. It is further submitted that applicant is having
criminal history which has been duly explained in the memo of
application. It is also submitted that the applicant undertakes that
he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed
out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there
is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
BAIL No. 14576 of 2026
2
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for
grant of bail to the applicant and it is submitted that notice has
been served on the first informant.
5. Prior to the present case, the applicant's side has lodged an FIR
against the first informant being Case Crime No. 555 of 2025 dated
20.12.2025. As per FIR, the applicant is said to have entered the
house of the first informant in drunken state and has sexually
harassed the minor daughter of the first informant. The applicant is
having criminal history which has been duly explained in the memo
of application.
6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence
reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits
of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail
application is ALLOWED.
7. Let the applicant- Bintu Kashyap @ Tuinya involved in the
aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following
conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts
to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witnesses.
(iii) 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 351 of
B.N.S.S.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall
not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the
BAIL No. 14576 of 2026
3
witnesses are present in the trial court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each
date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.
9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the
purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way
be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial
court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent
conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything
said in this order.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
May 7, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…