Allahabad High Court

VISHALversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 4 May 2026
Bench: RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA

Holding

The Court held that bail should be granted to the applicant.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Vishal under Section 61(2) of the B.N.S. 2023 and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 in Criminal Case No. 27 of 2026. The applicant claimed false implication in a flesh‑trade raid and argued that no woman or minor was forced to participate, and that co‑accused Roli Pathak, Sunita Kaur and Rehan had already been granted bail. The State opposed the bail but could not dispute the precedent of bail to similarly situated co‑accused. The Court noted the applicant’s clean record, the absence of any allegation of forced participation, and the prior bail orders, and therefore found no reason to deny bail. Consequently, the Court ordered the applicant’s release on bail subject to a personal bond, sureties and standard conditions.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 61(2) of the B.N.S. 2023 and the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
Whether the fact that co‑accused have been granted bail creates a precedent for granting bail to the applicant.
Whether any allegation of forced participation of women or minors warrants denial of bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S., 2023 — s. 61(2)
Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 — s. 3, 4, 5

Subjects

bail
Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act
B.N.S. 2023
false implication
co‑accused precedent
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15133 of 2026

Vishal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ramesh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 72
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, Learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No.27 of 2026, under Section 61(2) of
B.N.S. 2023 and Section 3/4/5 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention Act) 1956
(ITPA), Police Station- Kotwali, District- Moradabad.

3. The Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant
has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegation is that the
applicant along with 13 accused persons, who have been arrested in a raid
said to have been carried out at a hotel, were said to be involved in the
flesh trade. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that for the
offences alleged against the applicant, the maximum punishment
prescribed is seven years. He contends that no minor or any woman was
being forced against his/her will to participate in crime in question. The
Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the similarly
situated co-accused viz. Roli Pathak, Sunita Kaur @ Soniya and Rehan
have been granted regular bail by this Court vide its orders dated
30.04.2026, 4.5.2026 and 1.5.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No. - 14432 of 2026 (Roli Pathak Vs. State of U.P.), Criminal
Misc. Bail Application No. - 14798 of 2026 (Sunita Kaur Vs. State of U.P.)
and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 14709 of 2026 (Rehan Vs.
State of U.P.), respectively. The case of the applicant stands on a similar
BAIL No. 15133 of 2026
2

footing to that of the co-accused, therefore, similar indulgence may also
be granted to the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 22.03.2026.

4. The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail, however,
could not dispute the fact that similarly situated co-accused have already
been enlarged on bail by this Court.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for
the parties and perused the record.

6. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Similarly situated co-
accused have already been granted bail by this Court. The applicant is in
jail since 22.3.2026. There is no allegation of any woman or minor
children have been forced to participate in the crime in question.

7. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem
it fit to enlarge the applicant on bail.

8. The bail application is allowed.

9. Let the accused-applicant- Vishal, involved in above mentioned case
crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and
two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses
and co-operate in the trial.

iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the
trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted by the court
concerned.

10. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court
below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.
BAIL No. 15133 of 2026
3

11. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official
website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel
with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

12. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to
the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to
ensure early release of the applicant.

(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
May 5, 2026
A. Pandey

Digitally signed by :-
ANAND PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…