Allahabad High Court
SYORAJVEER ALIAS SURAJVEERversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME, LUCKNOW
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Syorajveer Alias Surajveer, who is charged with rape under Sections 64(1) and 351(3) of the IPC. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated due to a village rivalry, that the victim’s medico‑legal report did not support a rape allegation, and that he has no prior criminal record and has been in custody since 16 May 2026. The State opposed bail, relying on the FIR and the victim’s statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the CrPC. Referring to the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI (2025), Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P. (2024) and the Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail (2023), the Court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, granted bail with a personal bond, two sureties and standard conditions. The order also directed verification of identities, use of the Bail Order Management System for release, and compliance with the Supreme Court’s procedural directives.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a rape case pending trial despite the seriousness of the offence and the victim’s statements
- Whether the claim of false implication and lack of medico‑legal evidence warrants bail
- Whether the principles laid down in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI and Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P. apply to this case
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 180, 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 351(3), 64(1)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- false implication
- jail overcrowding
- trial pendency
- conditions of bail
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25099 of 2026
Syorajveer Alias Surajveer
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh Through Principal Secretary
Home, Lucknow .....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Adarsh Srivastava, Reena Pal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Amit Kumar Mishra, G.A., Suneel
Kumar
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Miss. Reena Pal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P.
Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Sunee Kumar, learned
counsel for the first informant.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 70 of 2026, under Sections 64(1),
351(3) BNS, Police Station Ramghat, District Bulandshahr during the
pendency of the trial.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some
village rivalry. It is further submitted that the victim is a major lady aged
about 50 years and medico-legal report of the victim does not support the
commission of rape on her and the same has been conducted promptly. It
is also submitted that the applicant has been languishing in jail since
16.5.2026 and he is having no criminal history. It is lastly submitted that
in case the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail
and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A.
have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, however, it is submitted that
FIR has been lodged promptly and the victim in her statement recorded
under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has supported the allegations of
BAIL No. 25099 of 2026
2
commission of rape on her, therefore, there is no reason to falsely
implicate the applicant.
5. As per the allegation in the FIR, the applicant is said to have
committed rape on the victim who is a major lady aged about 50 years,
however, medico-legal report of the victim does not support the
commission of rape on her and the same has been conducted promptly. T
he applicant has been languishing in jail since 16.5.2026 and he is having
no criminal history and he has been falsely implicated in this case due to
village rivalry.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions
of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of
offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account
overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial
courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex
Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation
reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 as well as guideline of this Court
in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC
Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is
entitled to be enlarged on bail.
7. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED.
8. Let the applicant- Syorajveer Alias Surajveer involved in the
aforementioned 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, 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 cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely
without seeking any adjournment.
BAIL No. 25099 of 2026
3
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or
commission of any crime after being released on bail.
(iv) The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the
bond executed by him.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as well
as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
11. 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.
12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal within 24
hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4
of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
September 8, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…