Allahabad High Court
KAUSHAL RAVversusSTATE 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, as the case is fit for bail.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Kaushal Rav, who was arrested in Crime No. 193 of 2026 for offences including assault, attempt to commit rape, and causing grievous hurt. The applicant claimed false implication, asserting a consensual relationship with the 21‑year‑old victim and pointing out that the medico‑legal report did not substantiate a rape allegation, while the prosecution highlighted injuries and a tooth mark suggesting attempted rape. The court examined the nature of the charges, the lack of prior criminal history, the applicant’s prolonged pre‑trial detention since 4 July 2026, and the heavy pendency of cases in the courts. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the judge concluded that the circumstances warranted the grant of bail. Accordingly, the applicant was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and complying with several conditions to prevent tampering or intimidation of witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted under Section 483 B.N.S.S. in a case involving alleged assault and attempted rape.
- Whether the applicant’s claim of false implication and lack of corroborative medico‑legal evidence on rape merit bail.
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of flight, evidence tampering, or intimidation of witnesses.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 351, 483
Subjects
- bail
- Section 483
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- false implication
- medico‑legal report
- attempted rape
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31005 of 2026
Kaushal Rav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bipin, Devesh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shailesh Kumar Tripathi
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Devesh Kumar along with Sri Bipin, learned counsel for the
applicant, Sri Shailesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the first
informant, Sri J.P. 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. 193 of 2026 under
Sections 115(2), 352, 324(4), 333, 64, 351(3), registered at Police Station
Lohta, District Varanasi 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 the victim is a major girl
aged about 21 years 5 months and she was in consensual relationship with
the applicant. It is further submitted that medico-legal report of the victim
does not support the allegation of rape on her though one stitch wound is
found on her wrist and one lacerated wound has been found in the thumb
of her right hand. It is further submitted that victim and applicant are
neighbours. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history
and he has been languishing in jail since 04.7.2026. It is also submitted
that the applicant 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.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the
BAIL No. 31005 of 2026
2
first informant have opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant
and submit that in the medico-legal report of the victim, some tooth mark
has been found on her shoulder and breast which suggest that applicant
attempted to commit rape on her. It is next submitted that the said act of
the applicant is inhuman and against all human decency.
5. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have entered into the house of the
first informant in a drunken state and assaulted the victim by hard and
blunt object and also tried to cut her wrist by sharp edged weapon and
attempted to commit rape on her. Some photographs have been produced
before the Court in order to show that applicant and the victim, who are
stated to be neighbours, were in consensual relationship. Medico-legal
report of the victim does not support the allegation of rape on her though
one stitch wound on her wrist and one lacerated wound in the thumb of
her right hand has been found. Applicant has no criminal history and he
has been languishing in jail since 04.7.2026.
6. 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.
7. Let the applicant Kaushal Rav 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.
BAIL No. 31005 of 2026
3
(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.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
9. 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.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
September 24, 2026
Madhurima
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…