Allahabad High Court
AJIT PASWANversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to bail in the present case.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Ajit Paswan, who was arrested in a case registered under Sections 69, 352 and 351(2) of the same Act. The petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated, noting that the 20‑year‑old female victim had voluntarily entered a consensual relationship and had refused a medico‑legal examination, while the petitioner had no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual allegations. After reviewing the FIR, the victim’s statements, and the applicant’s lack of criminal history, the Court found the circumstances suitable for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits. Consequently, bail was granted on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and a set of conditions to prevent intimidation of witnesses or tampering with evidence. The order expressly limited its scope to the bail application and did not prejudice the trial court’s future judgment.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for offences under Sections 69, 352 and 351(2) of the same Act.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal record and the circumstances of the case justify the grant of bail.
- Whether imposing conditions on the applicant is sufficient to safeguard the trial process.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 180, 183, 351(2), 352, 483, 69
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- false implication
- marriage dispute
- witness intimidation
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31026 of 2026
Ajit Paswan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Surendra Mohan Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Ms. Astha Sharma, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Surendra Mohan Mishra,
learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.P. Mauryam, 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. 252 of 2026 under Sections 69, 352, 351(2) BNS registered at
Police Station Chauri Chaura, District Gorakhpur 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 20 years as per
FIR itself. It is further submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under
section 180 BNSS has herself stated that her marriage with the applicant was
solemnized in a temple, however, he refused to solemnize the marriage in court and
also refused to live with her. It is next submitted that the victim has stated in her
statement under section 183 BNSS that she was in consensual relationship with the
applicant for the last 3-4 years and physical relation was also established between
them and mother of the applicant is not agreeable to their marriage. It is further
submitted that the victim refused to undergo medico-legal examination. It is further
submitted that applicant has no criminal history and he has been languishing in jail
since 25.7.2026. 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, however, he does not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. As per the FIR, the victim has stated that she is aged about 20 years and she has
entered into matrimonial alliance with the applicant in a temple, however, he has
refused to solemnize the marriage in court and also refused to live with her. The
BAIL No. 31026 of 2026
2
victim is major and she has refused to undergo medico-legal examination. Applicant
has no criminal history and he has been languishing in jail since 25.7.2026
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 Ajit Paswan 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.
(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.
September 24, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…