Allahabad High Court

SAMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 23 September 2026
Bench: YOGESH DUBEY JOINT REGISTRAR JUDICIAL

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail as the case is fit for 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, on behalf of Samar Singh, who was arrested in a rape case (Crime No. 209 of 2026) alleged to have occurred on 15 February 2026. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated to evade repayment of a Rs.2,10,000 loan and highlighted contradictions in the FIR and the victim’s statements regarding the date of the incident. The victim, a married woman, was found pregnant, which the applicant argued was consistent with her marriage date and did not necessarily support the rape allegation. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offence, but the court noted the applicant’s clean record, the pendency of trial, and the lack of clear evidence. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court found the case fit for bail and ordered release on personal bond with conditions. The bail was granted subject to standard conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 despite serious rape allegations
Whether contradictions in the FIR and victim's statements affect the bail eligibility
Whether the alleged motive of loan recovery justifies a presumption of false implication

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 180, 183, 351(3), 483, 64(1)

Subjects

bail
rape
false implication
loan dispute
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Section 483
criminal procedure
evidence tampering
witness intimidation

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31016 of 2026

Samar Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajeev Sawhney
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

1. Heard Sri Rajeev Sawhney, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Ashish Kumar Tripathi, 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. 209 of 2026 under
Sections 64(1), 351(3) BNS registered at Police Station Kiratpur, District
Bijnor 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. It is further submitted that
applicant had advanced loan of Rs.2,10,000/- to the first informant on
29.4.2026 and in order to evade the payment, he has lodged the present
case against the applicant. It is further submitted that as per the FIR,
applicant is said to have committed rape on the victim on 15.2.2026 and
the FIR was lodged on 05.7.2026. It is further submitted that victim is a
major and married lady and there is material contradiction in the date of
the incident mentioned in the FIR and in the statement of the victim. It is
further submitted that the victim has been found pregnant as per the FIR
itself and since she was married on 30.4.2026, her pregnancy is quite
possible. It is further submitted that some of the co-villagers have given
affidavit before Superintendent of Police concerned to the effect that
applicant has given loan of Rs.2,10,000/- to the first informant. It is
BAIL No. 31016 of 2026
2

further submitted that applicant has no criminal history and he has been
languishing in jail since 20.7.2026. 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. has opposed the prayer for grant of
bail to the applicant.

5. As per the FIR which has been lodged on 05.7.2026 alleging therein
that applicant who is uncle of the victim, committed rape on her on
15.2.2026. The victim is a major and married lady aged about 22 years.
She has stated in her statement under section 180 BNSS that applicant
committed rape on her on 24.3.2026 and similar statement has been made
by her in statement under section 183 BNSS. Thus, there is material
contradiction regarding the date of the incident mentioned in the FIR as
well as in the statements of the victim. The victim has been found
pregnant as per the FIR itself and since she was married on 30.4.2026, her
pregnancy is quite possible. Applicant is said to have given a loan of
Rs.2,10,000/- to the first informant and it is submitted that in order to
evade the payment, the present case has been lodged. Applicant has no
criminal history and he has been languishing in jail since 20.7.2026.

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 Samar Singh 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.
BAIL No. 31016 of 2026
3

(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.

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…