Allahabad High Court
GAURAVversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted given the nature and gravity of the gang‑rape allegations.
Summary
The applicant, Gaurav, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 116 of 2025) involving allegations of gang rape under several sections of the BNS. The applicant claimed innocence, asserting that the alleged incident was a consensual relationship and that the victim’s statement was misleading. The prosecution argued that the victim was raped by the applicant and co‑accused Sachin, emphasizing the seriousness of the gang‑rape allegation and the victim’s lack of consent. After hearing both sides, the court found no sufficient ground to grant bail, citing the nature and gravity of the accusations. Consequently, the bail application was rejected, and the trial court was directed to expedite the trial. The court clarified that its observations were limited to the bail application and would not affect the trial’s merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a gang‑rape case during the pendency of trial
- Whether the victim’s claim of consensual relationship negates the seriousness of the alleged offences
- Whether the nature and gravity of the allegations justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 127(2), 142, 333, 351(3), 352, 70(1), 87
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- gang rape
- consent
- trial expeditious
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16450 of 2026
Gaurav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kamal Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No. 28 out of 269)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Kamal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. This bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking
bail in Case Crime No. 116 of 2025, under Sections 70(1), 87, 127(2),
351(3), 333, 352, 142 of BNS, Police Station- Churki, District - Jalaun,
during the pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has
nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The victim is the
consenting party as far as the applicant is concerned.
5. Learned counsel has also pointed out that the victim, in her statement
recorded under Section 180 BNSS, has categorically stated that she was
disrobed by the applicant and that gang rape was committed upon her by
the applicant and co-accused Sachin. It is, however, contended that what
was essentially a consensual relationship has been given the colour of
gang rape at the instance of the victim, and that the only alleged fault of
the applicant is that he had gone to Gujarat.
6. Learned counsel has further contended that the applicant is languishing
BAIL No. 16450 of 2026
2
in jail since 14.01.2026, having no criminal history to his credit. In case,
the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and
shall cooperate with trial.
7. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application
on the ground that the victim was raped by the applicant, who is a resident
of the same village, and that, out of shame and in order to save her from
familial and societal stigma, the informant initially refrained from lodging
the FIR and instead solemnised the victim’s marriage elsewhere. It is
alleged that, even thereafter, the applicant along with co-accused Sachin
committed gang rape upon her. It is further urged that, even if there was
any prior consensual relationship with the applicant, he invited his friend
Sachin to join him, and both of them committed rape upon her, and the
victim cannot, in law, be treated as a consenting party for two persons at
the same time.
8. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties
and perused the material on record, this Court does not find any ground to
enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage. In view of the nature and
gravity of the allegations, including the specific accusation of gang rape
in the victim’s statement, the bail application is, accordingly, rejected.
9. However, the Trial Court is directed to decide the aforesaid case
expeditiously, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.
10. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts
brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and
the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case
during trial.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 14, 2026
Siddhant
Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHANT SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…