Allahabad High Court
AKRAM BEGversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Ak Ram Beg, who was arrested in connection with a case involving alleged rape, attempt to murder, drug possession and an obscene video of the victim. The applicant claimed false implication due to business rivalry, highlighted the victim's refusal to undergo a medico‑legal examination and the absence of the alleged video as evidence. The State opposed bail, pointing to recovered drugs and the obscene video on the applicant's laptop. The court examined the nature of the offences, the delay of two years in filing the FIR, the applicant's prior criminal record, and the need to decongest jails, while relying on recent Supreme Court precedents on bail. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court concluded that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to a personal bond, sureties and strict conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged rape, attempt to murder, drug possession and an obscene video despite the seriousness of the offences.
- Whether the two‑year delay in lodging the FIR affects the applicant's right to bail.
- Whether the applicant's prior criminal history and alleged possession of drugs justify denial of bail.
- How the Supreme Court decisions in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI, Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P., and the Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail case influence the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 308, 351, 61, 64, 78
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- attempt to murder
- drug possession
- obscene video
- delay in FIR
- Supreme Court bail jurisprudence
- overcrowded jails
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29007 of 2026
Akram Beg
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Atiqur Rahman Siddiqui, Nafees
Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Atiqur Rahman Siddiqui and Sri Nafees Ahmad, learned
counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 202 of 2026, under Sections 308(5),
64(2)M, 78, 61(2), 351(2) BNS, Police Station Kotwali District Bareilly,
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 due to some
business rivalry. It is further submitted that victim is a major lady aged
about 48 years and she has refused to undergo medico-legal examination.
It is further submitted that no video as alleged has been recovered during
investigation. It is also submitted that the applicant has been languishing
in jail since 5.5.2026 and he is having criminal history of one case which
has been duly explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today. 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.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail
but could not dispute the aforesaid facts, however, it is submitted that
some drugs have been recovered from the possession of the applicant and
obscene video of the victim has been found in his laptop, however, said
BAIL No. 29007 of 2026
2
video has not been made viral by the applicant.
5. In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that if any
relationship has been established between the applicant and the victim the
same appears to be consensual and the FIR has been lodged after a delay
of two years.
6. As per the allegation in the FIR which has been lodged after a delay of
two years, the applicant is said to have committed rape on the victim who
is major by administering some intoxicating substance to her, however,
the victim has refused to undergo medico-legal examiantion. It is
submitted by the learned AGA that some drugs have been recovered from
the possession of the applicant and obscene video of the victim has been
found in his laptop, however, no video has been made viral. The applicant
has been languishing in jail since 5.5.2026 and he is having criminal
history of one case which has been duly explained in the supplementary
affidavit filed today.
7. 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.
8. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED.
9. Let the applicant- Akram Beg 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,
BAIL No. 29007 of 2026
3
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.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground
for cancellation of bail.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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 8, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…