Allahabad High Court
SUHAILversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Suhail, who was arrested in a rape case (Crime No. 109 of 2026) but was not named in the FIR. The applicant's name first appeared in a later informant statement alleging he helped commit the offence, while the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the Evidence Act were contradictory and her medico‑legal report did not support a rape allegation. The co‑accused Danish and Faisal had already been granted bail, and Suhail had no prior criminal record and had been in custody since 5 June 2026. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual matrix. Relying on Supreme Court precedents concerning bail, jail overcrowding, and trial pendency, the Court held that Suhail was entitled to bail and ordered his release on personal bond with conditions. The bail order was issued without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant, who was not named in the FIR and whose involvement is alleged only in a later informant statement, is entitled to bail pending trial.
- Whether the nature of the alleged offence, the contradictory victim statements, and the lack of supporting medico‑legal evidence justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 70(1)
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 180, 183
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- false implication
- criminal procedure
- evidence
- jail overcrowding
- trial pendency
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27036 of 2026
Suhail
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Bind
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. List revised. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Bind, learned counsel for the
applicant and Sri Jai Krishna Chaurasiya, learned State Law Officer for
the State.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 109 of 2026, under Sections 70(1)
BNS, Police Station Chandpur, District Bijnor, 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 and the applicant
is not named in the FIR and co-accused Danish and Tahir have already
been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is further
submitted that the victim in her statement under Sections 180 and 183
BNSS has not named the applicant and his name for the first time has
surfaced in the subsequent statement of the first informant recorded under
Section 180 BNSS in which it is stated that the applicant extended help in
commission of the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the victim
is a major lady aged about 25 to 30 years and her medico-legal
examination does not support the allegation of rape. It is also submitted
that the applicant has been languishing in jail since 5.6.2026 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.
BAIL No. 27036 of 2026
2
4. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. Applicant is not named in the FIR and as per the allegation in the FIR,
co-accused Danish and Faisal and two unknown persons are said to have
taken away the victim and co-accused Danish and Faisal are said to have
committed gang rape on her, however, she in her statement under Section
180 BNSS has stated that she is aged about 26 years and she was in
relationship with co-accused Danish for the last three months and she was
called by co-accused Danish and she had left her home on her free will
and co-accused Danish established physical relationship with her,
however, co-accused Faisal committed rape on her on the point of
country-made pistol whereas in her statement under Section 183 BNSS
she has stated that co-accused Faisal committed rape on her. The name of
the applicant for the first time has surfaced in the subsequent statement of
the first informant recorded under Section 180 BNSS in which it is stated
that the applicant extended help in commission of the alleged offence. T
he victim is a major lady aged about 25 to 30 years and her medico-legal
examination does not support the allegation of rape. The applicant has
been languishing in jail since 5.6.2026 and he is having no criminal
history.
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- Suhail involved in the aforementioned crime be
BAIL No. 27036 of 2026
3
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.
(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 14, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…