Allahabad High Court
VISHNU KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the contradictions in the victim’s statements, lack of injury, the accused’s clean record, and the Supreme Court’s bail guidelines warranted granting bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Vishnu Kumar, accused of rape under a First Information Report dated 30 June 2026. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, citing contradictions in the victim’s statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, the absence of any external injuries, and that the alleged incident was a consensual relationship. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the victim’s allegation of rape and the fact that the victim’s and her husband’s statements implicated the accused, with the clothes sent for forensic examination. Referring to the Supreme Court’s recent guidelines on bail, the court noted the accused’s clean criminal record, the overcrowding of jails, and the need to balance the nature of the offence with the presumption of innocence. Consequently, the court granted bail with a personal bond and standard conditions, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a rape case pending trial under Section 64(1) of the CrPC.
- Whether contradictions in the victim’s statements and lack of physical injury justify bail despite the seriousness of the alleged offence.
- Whether the Supreme Court’s guidelines on bail and the condition of overcrowded jails influence the decision to grant bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 64(1)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- Section 64 CrPC
- contradictory statements
- consensual relationship
- overcrowded jails
- Supreme Court bail guidelines
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30666 of 2026
Vishnu Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vinay Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Prasoon Kumar
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Shri Vinay Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant,
Shri Prasoon Kumar, learned counsel for the first informant and Shri
Ashish Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the
record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 249 of 2026, under Sections 64(1) of
B.N.S., Police Station Farah, District Mathura, during the pendency of the
trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case though there is no
incriminating material against him. It is further submitted that there are
material contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under
Sections 180 and 183 BNSS as the victim in her statement recorded under
Section 180 BNSS has stated that the applicant and her husband were
sleeping on the terrace and she was sleeping on the ground floor, whereas,
the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS has stated
that she along with her husband were sleeping on the terrace and the
applicant was sleeping on the ground floor and the husband of the victim
in his statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS has stated that he
along with victim was sleeping on the terrace and the applicant was
sleeping on the ground floor and he asked the victim to bring water from
the ground floor and she went to the water when the alleged incident took
BAIL No. 30666 of 2026
2
place. It is further submitted that the present case is the case of consensual
relationship between the applicant and the victim and the victim is the sister-
in-law of the applicant and she is aged about 35 years and the applicant is
aged about 24 years and no external injury has been found on the body of the
victim and no alarm was raised by her when the alleged incident took place.
It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history and
the applicant has been languishing in jail since 30.06.2026, in case, he is
granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in
the trial proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A.
have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted by
them that the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183
BNSS has stated that the applicant committed rape on her and the clothes
of the victim and the applicant have been sent for FSL examination.
5. In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present case
is the case of consensual relationship between the applicant and the victim
and no alarm was raised by the victim and no resistance was offered by
her and no injury has been found on her external parts of the body.
6. As per first information report, the applicant is said to have committed
rape on the victim aged about 35 years and she is a major married lady
having children. It is further submitted that the applicant is said to be the
younger brother-in-law of the victim and this is a case of consensual
relationship between the applicant and the victim and no alarm was raised
by the victim and no resistance was offered by her and no injury has been
found on her external parts of the body. It is further submitted that there
are material contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under
Sections 180 and 183 BNSS as the victim in her statement recorded under
Section 180 BNSS has stated that the applicant and her husband were
sleeping on the terrace and she was sleeping on the ground floor, whereas,
the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS has stated
that she along with her husband were sleeping on the terrace and the
applicant was sleeping on the ground floor and the husband of the victim
in his statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS has stated that he
along with victim was sleeping on the terrace and the applicant was
BAIL No. 30666 of 2026
3
sleeping on the ground floor and he asked the victim to bring water from
the ground floor and she went to bring water when the alleged incident
took place. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal
history and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 30.06.2026.
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- Vishnu 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.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground
BAIL No. 30666 of 2026
4
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
Jail Superintendent, Mathura 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 23, 2026
RKM
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…