Allahabad High Court
HARPHOOLversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The accused is entitled to bail and the bail application is allowed.
Summary
Harphool applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 25 of 2026) under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the BNS, alleging false implication for an enticement charge. The victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS indicated that she voluntarily left her home, married the accused, and that no sexual intercourse or enticement occurred. The accused has no prior criminal record and has been in custody since 5 June 2026. The State opposed the bail, but the court considered the victim’s statement and the lack of a substantive basis for the charge. Relying on Supreme Court precedents in Girish Gandhi v. State of U.P. and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re, the court held that the applicant is entitled to bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed, subject to a personal bond and two sureties each.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused Harphool is entitled to bail under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the BNS given the victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS and the absence of prior criminal history.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 137(2), 183, 87
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- enticement
- Section 183 statement
- personal bond
- sureties
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31814 of 2026
Harphool
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sinhasan Ram
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Sinhasan Ram, learned counsel for accused applicant and
learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Harphool to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 25 of 2026, under
Sections 137(2), 87 of BNS, P.S.- Satti, District- Kanpur Dehat during the
pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for accused applicant that the
accused applicant has been falsely implicated in the FIR dated 31.5.2026
lodged by brother of the victim for enticement. It is contended that the
victim in her statement under Section 183 BNSS has specifically stated
that she was in love with the accused applicant and left her parental home
on her own and went at the house of the applicant where she solemnized
marriage in Court. There was no sexual intercourse between them and she
was not enticed by the accused applicant. The charge sheet has been
submitted. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is
languishing in jail since 5.6.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on
bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
BAIL No. 31814 of 2026
2
6. Considering the statement of the victim under Section 183 BNSS, the
accused applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is
allowed.
8. The accused/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of court concerned in view of observation made by the
Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in
re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and
speedy disposal.
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
September 23, 2026
Krishna*
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…