Allahabad High Court
GAUSIYA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The Court held that, prima facie, the case merits the grant of bail and therefore allowed the bail applications.
Summary
The High Court considered bail applications filed by Gausiya, Rasida Bano and Sahid Ansari (alias Sahjaad) in a case involving alleged offences under sections 87, 61(2), 127(2), 351(3) and 69 of the BNS. The applicants claimed they were falsely implicated, argued that the victim’s statement indicated consent and that no video evidence of the alleged indecent act had been recovered. The State opposed bail but could not refute the applicants’ submissions or point to any prior criminal history. Weighing the nature of the offences, the victim’s consent, the absence of material evidence and the lack of a criminal record, the Court held that the case was suitable for bail. Consequently, the Court ordered the release of all three applicants on personal bond and sureties, subject to standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in view of the alleged offences under the BNS and the nature of the evidence.
- Whether the victim’s statement indicating consent and the non‑recovery of the alleged video affect the bail decision.
- Whether the absence of prior criminal history warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 127(2), 351(3), 61(2), 69, 87
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- consent
- evidence
- video
- no prior record
- BNS
- sections 87
- section 61(2)
- section 127(2)
- section 351(3)
- section 69
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26087 of 2025
Gausiya And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hriday Raj Tripathi, Pankaj Kumar
Shukla, Sunita Chauhan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Along with :
1. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 33962 of 2025:
Sahid Ansari Alias Sahjaad
Versus
State of U.P.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No. 126 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Rejoinder affidavit filed today (In C.M.B.A. No.
26087 of 2025) by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
2. Since both bail applications pertain to same Case Crime Number, the
same are being decided by a common order.
3. Heard Sri S.P. Singh, Advocate holding brief of Hriday Raj Tripathi (In
C.M.B.A. No. 26087 of 2025) and Sri Ram Gopal Tripathi (In C.M.B.A.
No.33962 of 2025), learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Jai Kishan
Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on
record.
4. Applicants Gausiya and Rasida Bano seek bail in Case Crime No. 87 of
2025 u/s 87, 61(2), 127(2), and 351(3) of the BNS, while applicant Sahid
Ansari alias Sahjaad seeks bail in the same case u/s 87 and 69 of the BNS,
all pertaining to Police Station - Dubaulia, District - Basti, during the
pendency of trial.
BAIL No. 26087 of 2025
2
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has urged that the applicants have been
falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that the
statement of the victim is vacillating and that she appears to be a consenting
party. The victim is 19 years of age and, as such, is a major.
6. Learned counsel has further submitted that the allegation against applicant
- Gausiya is that she recorded a video of the indecent act committed by
applicant - Sahid Ansari alias Sahjaad, yet there is no recovery of any such
video whatsoever. It is also stated that the applicants in the leading bail
applications have been in judicial custody since 12.05.2025, and the
applicant in the connected bail application has been in custody since
23.06.2025. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse
the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.
7. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail
application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned
counsel for the applicants and also the fact that the applicants have no
criminal history.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions
made by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the offence, the
severity of the punishment, and also considering the victim's statement
recorded u/s 183 BNSS which indicates her consent as her involvement
appears to be consensual coupled with the fact that there has been no
recovery of any alleged video of the victim, I am of the view that, prima
facie, this is a fit case to release the applicants on bail. Both the bail
applications are hereby allowed.
9. Let the applicants- Gausiya, Rasida Bano and Sahid Ansari Alias
Sahjaad, 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 they shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate
witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.
10. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The
observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
April 23, 2026
Siddhant
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHANT SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…