Allahabad High Court

KHURSHID ALAM @ GOLDENversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 13 September 2026
Bench: YOGESH DUBEY JOINT REGISTRAR JUDICIAL

Holding

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Khurshid Alam @ Golden, who was arrested in connection with a case under IPC sections 69, 84, 115(2), 351(2) and 352, and whose alleged offence involved alleged pressure on a woman to convert her religion. The victim’s statements under CrPC sections 180 and 183 were found to contain material contradictions, and the applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, had no prior criminal record, and had been in custody since 13 May 2026. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the allegation of religious conversion pressure and pending forensic report. The Court, taking into account the contradictions, the applicant’s clean record, the principle of avoiding unnecessary pre‑trial detention, the overcrowding of jails, and recent Supreme Court precedents on bail, decided that the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, the bail was granted subject to a personal bond, sureties and standard conditions, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant, despite the serious nature of the alleged offences, is entitled to bail pending trial.
Whether the contradictions in the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 CrPC affect the necessity of pre‑trial detention.
Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal history and the state of jail overcrowding justify granting bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 180, 183
Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 351(2), 352, 69, 84

Subjects

bail
false implication
contradictory statements
IPC sections 69,84,115(2),351(2),352
CrPC sections 180,183
overcrowded jails
Supreme Court bail jurisprudence
religious conversion pressure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27227 of 2026

Khurshid Alam @ Golden
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prem Prakash Yadav, Satya Prakash
Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashish Singh, G.A., Shashikant Pandey

Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

1. Heard Sri Prem Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and
Sri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ashish Singh,
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. 0081 of 2026, under Sections 69, 84,
115(2), 351(2), 352 BNS, Police Station Kone, District Sonebhadra,
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 on perusal of
the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it
appears that she is a consenting party and there are material contradictions
in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS
as she in her statement under Section 180 BNSS has not stated anything
regarding the applicant asking her to get her religion converted whereas in
her statement under Section 183 BNSS she has stated that the applicant
put pressure on her to get her religion converted from Hinduism to Islam.
It is further submitted that the victim is major and already married lady to
someone else and judicial proceedings of divorce is pending before the
competent Court. It is also submitted that the applicant has been
languishing in jail since 13.5.2026 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.
BAIL No. 27227 of 2026
2

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A.
have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it is submitted that the
victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS has stated that
the applicant exerted pressure on the victim to get her religion converted
from Hinduism to Muslim and FSL report is still awaited.

5. As per the allegation in the FIR, the applicant is said to have enticed
away the daughter of the first informant who is major, however, the
victim has been recovered and it is submitted that on perusal of the
statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it
appears that she is a consenting party. There appears to be material
contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180
and 183 BNSS as she in her statement under Section 180 BNSS has not
stated anything regarding the applicant asking her to get her religion
converted whereas in her statement under Section 183 BNSS she has
stated that the applicant put pressure on her to get her religion converted
from Hinduism to Islam. The applicant has been languishing in jail since
13.5.2026 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- Khurshid Alam @ Golden 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:-
BAIL No. 27227 of 2026
3

(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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…