Allahabad High Court
SAURABH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Saurabh Yadav, accused of rape, blackmail, and recording an obscene video of the victim. The prosecution alleged that the accused forced the victim into sexual intercourse after blackmail, while the defense highlighted a delayed FIR, lack of medical injuries, and alleged false implication due to a property dispute. The court noted contradictions in the victim’s statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the CrPC, the overcrowding of jails, and recent Supreme Court precedents emphasizing bail in such circumstances. Weighing these factors, the court granted bail with a personal bond, two sureties, and strict conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or further criminal conduct. The order also directed procedural steps for the applicant’s release and compliance with electronic bail order systems.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in registration of the FIR and lack of medical evidence justify granting bail.
- Whether contradictions in the victim's statements affect the necessity of custodial detention.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged rape and blackmail precludes bail under the applicable statutes.
- Whether overcrowding of prisons and pendency of cases warrant bail in this case.
- Whether the applicant satisfies the criteria for bail under Sections 64 and 351(3) IPC and Section 175(3) CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 175(3), 180, 183, 64
- Indian Penal Code — s. 351(3)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- blackmail
- FIR delay
- overcrowded prisons
- contradictory statements
- Section 351 IPC
- Section 64 CrPC
- Supreme Court precedent
- property dispute
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33583 of 2025
Saurabh Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Dubey, Bhaiya Ghanshyam Singh,
Kameshwar Singh, Sudhanshu Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and
perused the record.
2. The present application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail
in Case Crime No.149 of 2025, under Section 64, 351(3) BNS, Police Station
Sikandarpur, District- Ballia.
3. As per the prosecution story, the applicant clicked an obscene video of the
victim and thereafter started blackmailing her. When the applicant showed
the obscene video to her husband, he started beating her. Thereafter, the
victim started living separately after taking a room on rent. Taking
advantage of the loneliness of the victim, the applicant came to her room and
started blackmailing her to establish physical relations with him. When the
victim refused, the applicant allegedly forcibly committed rape upon her.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged incident is
dated 30.03.2025, whereas the application u/s 175(3) BNSS to register the
FIR was filed on 18.04.2025 and then FIR was registered on 22.05.2025.
Therefore, there was considerable delay in lodging the FIR without any
proper explanation. It is further submitted that the medical examination
report of the victim does not disclose any mark of injury or sign of sexual
assault.
5. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has been falsely
implicated, mainly on account of a property dispute with the family of the
victim. The victim is aged about 35 years and has two children. It is lastly
BAIL No. 33583 of 2025
2
submitted that charge sheet has been filed by the police, therefore, there is
no requirement for custodial interrogation. The applicant has no criminal
history and he is languishing in jail since 23.05.2025. In case, he is granted
bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial
proceedings.
6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for
bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.
7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of
learned counsel for the parties and also keeping in view the fact that ther
is contradictions in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180
and 183 of the BNSS and also taking into account overcrowded jails and
heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts as well as
considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of
Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025
SCC OnLine SC 3038 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on
bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant- Saurabh Yadav involved in the aforementioned crime
be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and 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 cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without
seeking any adjournment.
iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of
any crime after being released on bail.
iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond
executed by him.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
BAIL No. 33583 of 2025
3
10. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
11. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
downloaded copy of this order from the official website of High Court
Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that
the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.
12. It is directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the
concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure
early release of the applicant.
13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or on e-prison portal and Trial
Court via e-mode within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex
Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu
Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in
(2024) 10 SCC 685 as well as Pila Pahan @ Peela Pahan and others Vs.
State of Jharkhand and another, in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 169 of
2025, decided on 29.05.2026.
September 24, 2026
Sushma
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SUSHAMA YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…