Allahabad High Court
SHAILESH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
Shailesh Yadav applied for bail in a case (Crim. No. 227 of 2026) alleging offences under Sections 64, 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 127(4) of the IPC, including rape and confinement of a 31‑year‑old married woman. The applicant contended that the victim was a consenting party, that the medico‑legal report did not support a rape allegation, and that he had been falsely implicated and had no prior criminal record. The prosecution argued that the applicant had enticed, confined the victim for 27 days and committed rape. The Court, taking note of overcrowded jails, pendency of trials, and the Supreme Court precedents in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI (2025) and Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P. (2024), held that bail could be granted without expressing a view on the merits. Accordingly, the bail application was allowed subject to a personal bond, two sureties and strict conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or further criminal activity.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite the serious nature of the alleged offences
- Whether the victim's alleged consent and the lack of medico‑legal evidence negate the charge of rape
- Whether the risk of evidence tampering or further offences warrants denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 127(4), 351(3), 352, 64
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- consent
- rape
- IPC sections
- overcrowded jails
- trial pendency
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30920 of 2026
Shailesh Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Surendra Dev, Yasavant Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Dewendra Singh, G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. List revised. Heard Sri P.P. Rao, holding brief of Sri Yasavant Kumar,
learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for
the State and Sri Dewendra 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. 227 of 2026, under Sections 64,
115(2), 352, 351(3), 127(4) BNS, Police Station Pipiganj, District
Gorakhpur, 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
and other attending facts and circumstances, it appears that she is a
consenting party. It is further submitted that the victim is a major married
lady aged about 31 years years and the medico-legal report of the victim
does not support the commission of rape on her. It is also submitted that t
he applicant has been languishing in jail since 24.7.2026 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.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A.
have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the
aforesaid facts, however, it is submitted that the applicant enticed away
the victim and took her to various places and confined her for 27 days and
BAIL No. 30920 of 2026
2
he committed rape on her.
5. As per the allegation in the FIR, the applicant is said to have enticed
away the victim and took her to various places and confined her for 27
days and committed rape on her, however, it is submitted that on perusal
of the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS
and other attending facts and circumstances, it appears that she is a
consenting party. The victim is a major married lady aged about 31 years
years and the medico-legal report of the victim does not support the
commission of rape on her. The applicant has been languishing in jail
since 24.7.2026 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- Shailesh Yadav 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.
BAIL No. 30920 of 2026
3
(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.)
October 1, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…