Allahabad High Court
RAHULversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail and granted bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Rahul, who was charged under IPC sections 191(2), 69, 352 and 351(3) for allegedly establishing a relationship on a false promise of marriage and later refusing to marry. The prosecution alleged deception, while the defence argued that the applicant was innocent, had no prior criminal record, and that the victim was 21 years old with no evidence of misrepresentation. The court noted the absence of clinching evidence and the applicant’s willingness to cooperate with the trial. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court found that the applicant had made out a case for bail. Accordingly, bail was granted on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence, not intimidating witnesses, and appearing for trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged false promise of marriage and offences under IPC sections 191(2), 69, 352 and 351(3).
- Whether the lack of clinching evidence and the applicant’s clean record justify bail.
- Whether conditions can be imposed on bail to safeguard the trial process.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 191(2), 351(3), 352, 69
Subjects
- bail
- false promise of marriage
- IPC sections 191(2) 69 352 351(3)
- trial conditions
- sureties
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15355 of 2026
Rahul
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajesh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No. 53 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Umesh
Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 42 of 2026, under Sections
191(2), 69, 352, 351(3) BNS, Police Station Sakeet, District Etah, 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. As per ossification test report, the
age of the victim has come out to be 21 years. 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.
6. Learned counsel has further stated that there is no criminal history of the
applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.3.2026 and he is ready
to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not
BAIL No. 15355 of 2026
2
misuse the liberty of bail.
7. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently
opposed the bail application.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties; there being no clinching evidence to suggest
that the applicant misled the victim from the beginning and without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view
that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is
allowed.
9. Let the applicant- Rahul, who is involved in aforementioned case crime
be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each
in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to
following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties
be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
11. 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.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 6, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…