Allahabad High Court
ANIL KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for Anil Kumar, who was arrested in a rape case (Criminal No. 277 of 2026) involving alleged offences under Sections 70(1), 331(4) and 351(3) of the same Act. The applicant argued that the FIR was lodged after a four‑day delay, the medico‑legal report did not support a rape allegation, there was no photographic or video evidence, and he had no prior criminal record; he also pointed to the bail granted to a co‑accused. The State contended that the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS clearly implicated the applicant in a gang‑rape. After reviewing the record, the court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, found the case suitable for bail and ordered release on a personal bond with strict conditions. The order emphasized that it does not prejudice the trial court’s eventual judgment.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in a case involving alleged rape offences.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the lack of corroborative medical or photographic evidence affect the bail decision.
- Whether the grant of bail to a co‑accused influences the applicant’s eligibility for bail.
- Whether the applicant’s clean criminal record and the pendency of trial justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 180, 183, 331(4), 351(3), 483, 70(1)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- delay in FIR
- medico‑legal report
- consent
- conditions of bail
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28354 of 2026
Anil Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohammad Zakir
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shahrukh Khan
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Mohd. Zakir, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shahrukh Khan,
learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Uma Shankar Mishra, learned AGA for the
State-respondents and perused the record.
3. 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. 277 of 2026 under Sections 70(1), 331(4), 351(3) BNS
registered at Police Station Jahangirabad, District Bulandshahar during pendency of
the trial.
4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that FIR has been lodged
after delay of four days and the victim is a major lady. It is further submitted that
medico-legal report of the victim does not support the allegation of commission of
rape on her and, in fact, she was in consensual relationship with the applicant and
when she was caught with the applicant by her in-laws, the present case was lodged
against him. It is further submitted that co-accused Suraj has been granted bail by a
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.9.2026 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail
Application No. 26599 of 2026. It is further submitted that applicant, who has no
criminal history, has been languishing in jail since 08.6.2026 and he undertakes that
he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake
of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion
of trial.
5. 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 and submit that victim in her
statements under sections 180 and 183 BNSS has categorically stated that applicant
and co-accused Suraj committed gang rape on her.
6. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have established physical relationship with the
BAIL No. 28354 of 2026
2
victim four years ago and recorded some objectionable photographs and videos and on
the basis of the said photos and videos, he continued to commit rape on her. However,
no such video or photograph as alleged has been recovered during investigation. FIR
has been lodged after delay of four days and the medico-legal report of the victim,
who is a major lady, does not support the allegation of commission of rape on her. Co-
accused Suraj has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the a
pplicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since 08.6.2026.
7. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record
and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for
bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED.
8. Let the applicant Anil Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on
bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with 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 not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates
fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement
under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any
adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial
court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either
personally or through his counsel.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression
on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in
this order.
September 9, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…