Allahabad High Court

TRIPURARI PRAKASH TRIPATHI @ SONU TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 23 September 2026
Bench: GAUTAM CHOWDHARY

Holding

The court granted bail to the applicant, finding the case fit for release on bond with conditions.

Summary

The High Court considered a second bail application filed by Tripurari Prakash Tripathi @ Sonu Tiwari after an earlier application was rejected. The applicant argued that the victim’s testimony did not contain any allegation of rape, suggesting a low probability of conviction, and highlighted his lack of criminal history and willingness to comply with court conditions. The State opposed bail, contending that innocence could not be determined before trial, though it did not dispute the victim’s statement. Weighing the overall circumstances, the court, without expressing a view on the merits, deemed the case fit for bail and ordered release on personal bond with two sureties and several conditions. The bail was granted subject to compliance with those conditions and the possibility of cancellation on default.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the alleged offence and the pending trial
Whether the victim’s lack of a rape allegation in testimony affects the likelihood of conviction and thus bail eligibility
Whether the applicant’s personal circumstances and lack of prior criminal record justify bail

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 309(6), 3(5), 351(2), 70(1), 76

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
presumption of innocence
victim testimony
conditions of bail
second bail application

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31721 of 2026

Tripurari Prakash Tripathi @ Sonu Tiwari
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Atharva Dixit, Naina Chawla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 75
HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the record.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail
application moved on behalf of the applicant. The first was was rejected
by this Court vide order dated 14.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No. 39984 of 2025. Learned counsel further submits at the
trial the victim (P.W.1) in her testimony has not made any allegation of
rape against the applicant, which statement has been filed as Annexure
No. 16 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Thus, it is
argued that there is bleak chance that prosecution may prove its case
beyond reasonable doubt and the applicant may be convicted. Several
other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations
made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The
circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication
of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on
behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of
law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever
required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court
may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is
languishing in jail since 26.08.2025, having no criminal history.

3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the
applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be
adjudged before conclusion of trial, therefore, he does not deserve any
indulgence, but he has not disputed that the victim in her statement has
not made any allegation of rape against the applicant.

4. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of
allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on
merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail
application stands allowed.
BAIL No. 31721 of 2026
2

5. Let the applicant-Tripurari Prakash Tripathi @ Sonu Tiwari, be
enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 0240 of 2025, under Sections 115(2),
70(1), 76, 351(2), 3(5), 309(6) of B.N.S., Police Station- Phaphamau,
District- Prayagraj, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local
sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned
with the following conditions:

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of
which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police
officer or tamper with the evidence.

6. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court
concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance
with law.

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)
September 24, 2026
Mustaqeem.

Digitally signed by :-
MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…