Allahabad High Court
RAMBABU VISHWAKARMAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that the applicant made out a prima facie case for bail and therefore granted bail.
Summary
The applicant, Rambabu Vishwakarma, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 09 of 2026) alleging offences under Sections 69, 351(3) and 352 BNS of the Indian Penal Code, stemming from an alleged false promise of marriage and a subsequent consensual relationship with a 23‑year‑old woman. The prosecution contended that the applicant misled the victim, while the defence argued that the relationship was consensual, the victim was a major, and there was no conclusive evidence of deception. The State opposed bail, but the court, after considering the submissions and the lack of clinching evidence, found that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses. The order emphasized that the bail grant does not prejudice the trial on merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite allegations under Sections 69, 351(3) and 352 BNS of the IPC.
- Whether the facts disclosed establish a prima facie case for bail.
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 351(3), 352 BNS, 69
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- false promise of marriage
- consensual relationship
- prima facie case
- evidence tampering
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15280 of 2026
Rambabu Vishwakarma
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anoop Kumar Sharma, Santosh
Prajapati
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ram Autar Bind
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.30 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Maurya, Advocate holding brief of Sri Anoop
Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia,
learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on
record. Learned counsel for the informant is not present.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.09 of 2026, under Sections 69,
351(3), 352 BNS, Police Station Chunar, District Mirzapur, during the
pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established
corporeal relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage and
had later on refused to comply with the said promise.
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. The victim is a consenting party. It
is a clear cut case of consensual relationship between two major persons.
The victim is a 23 years old girl at this point of time. There is no clinching
evidence to suggest that the applicant misled the victim from the beginning.
The informant has converted a failed consensual physical relationship into a
criminal case. There is no criminal history of the applicant and he is in jail
since 7.1.2026. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the
BAIL No. 15280 of 2026
2
liberty of bail.
6. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the fact that victim is major and there being no clinching
evidence to suggest that the applicant misled her from the beginning, and
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the
Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail
application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant- Rambabu Vishwakarma, be released on bail on
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court
concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he
shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear
before the trial court as required.
9. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 6, 2026
Vikas Verma
Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…