Allahabad High Court
JAYABULversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The court held that, based on the victim’s statement under Section 183 and the accused’s clean record, the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The accused, Jayabul, was arrested in connection with an FIR dated 08.08.2025 alleging enticement of a minor. He contended that the victim’s statement under Section 183 indicated he merely called her and she voluntarily went to Delhi, and that he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, but the court considered the victim’s statement and the lack of any proven wrongdoing. Relying on Supreme Court precedents in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, the court held that the applicant was entitled to bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed, directing release on personal bond with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail under the Criminal Procedure Code given the victim’s statement and absence of criminal antecedents.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute a serious offence that justifies denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 137(2), 183, 351(2), 87
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- victim statement
- Criminal Procedure Code
- personal bond
- sureties
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33068 of 2026
Jayabul
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd Aamir
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Yasharth Raj Pandey, learned counsel holding brief appeared
for accused applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Jayabul to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 252 of 2025, under
Sections 137(2), 87, 351(2) BNS, P.S.- Masuri, District- Ghaziabad,
during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the accused
applicant has been falsely implicated in FIR dated 08.08.2025 lodged by
father of the victim for enticement. In the statement of victim recorded
under Section 183 BNSS, she specifically stated that accused applicant
called her and she went with the accused applicant to Delhi. The accused
applicant has not committed any wrong act with her. The applicant has no
criminal history. Charge sheet is submitted. The accused applicant is
languishing in jail since 14.08.2025. He seeks enlargement of accused on
bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. for State 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.
6. Considering the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS,
the accused/applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
BAIL No. 33068 of 2026
2
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
Sharad/-
Digitally signed by :-
SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…