Allahabad High Court
PUNITversusSTATE OF UP
- Decided
Holding
The Court allowed the bail application, granting bail to the accused with conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed by Punit, accused in a rape case (Crime No. 506 of 2026) where the FIR alleges he stood guard while co‑accused Anshu allegedly raped the victim. The applicant argued that the victim’s statements under sections 180 and 183 of the same Act indicate a consensual relationship, the medico‑legal report shows no injuries, and he has no prior criminal record, thus he is falsely implicated. The State’s counsel did not dispute these facts but opposed bail. After reviewing the record, the Court found the circumstances suitable for bail without expressing a view on the merits and ordered release on personal bond with two sureties, imposing standard conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses. The order expressly limited its effect to the bail application and clarified that the trial court remains free to decide the case on its merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in view of the alleged rape charges and the evidentiary material.
- Whether the alleged lack of injuries and the victim’s statements indicating a consensual relationship render the accusation against the applicant false, justifying bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 180, 183, 3(5), 351(2), 483, 70(1)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- rape allegation
- false implication
- evidentiary insufficiency
- conditions of bail
- Indian criminal law
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31594 of 2026
Punit
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Amit Rai, learned counsel for the applicant, 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. 506 of 2026 under Sections 70(1), 3(5), 351(2) BNS registered
at Police Station Kotwali City, 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 and there is no allegation of rape in the FIR as well as in
the statements of the victim recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS. It is further
submitted that victim is major aged about 24 years and on perusal of her statements
recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it appears that she was in consensual
relationship with co-accused Anshu. It is next submitted that medico-legal report of
the victim does not support the allegation of rape on her as no injury has been found
on her private part. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history and he
has been languishing in jail since 01.8.2026. 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, co-accused Anshu is said to have taken the victim to a room in the
college canteen in a broad day light and committed rape on her and the applicant is
said to have stood guard outside the said room. Similar statement has been made by
the victim in her statements under sections 180 and 183 BNSS, however, she has
further stated that she was in consensual relationship with co-accused Anshu for the
last three years and their marriage was also fixed. The victim is a major lady aged
BAIL No. 31594 of 2026
2
about 24 years and her medico-legal report does not support the allegation of rape on
her as no injury has been found on her private part. Applicant has no criminal history
and he has been languishing in jail since 01.8.2026.
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 Punit involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on
his furnishing a personal bond 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 23, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…