Allahabad High Court
PRASHANT KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, given the lack of substantive evidence, his clean record, and the need to address jail overcrowding.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Prashant Kumar, who was charged under Section 69 BNS for allegedly establishing a false marital promise and a consensual relationship with a 25‑year‑old woman. The applicant contended that the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNS were contradictory, there was no medical evidence of rape or pregnancy, and he had no prior criminal record, having been in custody since 25 May 2026. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the alleged offence. The Court, referencing the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI (2025) and Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P. (2024), as well as the policy on bail from the 2023 Suo Motu writ, held that the applicant was entitled to bail given the lack of substantive evidence, his clean record, and the need to alleviate jail overcrowding. Accordingly, the Court ordered his release on bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and specific conditions, directing verification of identities and electronic transmission of the order.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 483 BNS in view of the alleged offence and the evidentiary material.
- Whether contradictions in the victim’s statements and absence of medical evidence affect the bail decision.
- Whether considerations of jail overcrowding and pendency of cases justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 180, 183, 483, 69
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- false implication
- consensual relationship
- medical evidence
- jail overcrowding
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27317 of 2026
Prashant Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Om Prakash Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Devendra Yadav, G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Om Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Devendra Yadav, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri BP Singh,
learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer
to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 167 of 2026 under Section 69 BNS,
registered at Police Station Mehnagar, District Azamgarh during pendency
of the trial.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that 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 was
in consensual relationship with the applicant for the last six years. It is
further submitted that victim is major aged about 25 years and there is no
evidence regarding her pregnancy or its abortion. It is further submitted that
medico-legal report of the victim does not support commission of rape on
her and there are material contradictions in her statements recorded under
sections 180 and 183 BNSS. It is also submitted that applicant, who has no
criminal history, has been languishing in jail since 25.5.2026. It is lastly
submitted that in case applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty
of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first
informant opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.
BAIL No. 27317 of 2026
2
5. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have established physical relationship
with the victim on false promise of marriage for the last six years. The
victim is major aged about 25 years and there is no evidence regarding her
pregnancy or its abortion. Medico-legal report of the victim also does not
support commission of rape on her and it is submitted that there are material
contradictions in her statements recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS.
Applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since
25.5.2026.
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. Let the applicant Prashant Kumar 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.
(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.
BAIL No. 27317 of 2026
3
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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 29, 2026
Madhurima
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…