Allahabad High Court
RAMSHANKAR @ BIYAJUversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Ramshankar @ Biyaju, who was arrested in connection with offences under Sections 120B, 366, 323, 504, 506 and 376D of the IPC. The FIR alleged that the applicant had assisted a co‑accused in kidnapping the victim, but the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the Evidence Act were contradictory, and the police charge‑sheet named only the primary co‑accused. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, had no material linking him to the crime, and had been in custody since 27 July 2026. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual background. Relying on the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Kapil Wadhawan v CBI (2025) and Maya Tiwari v State of U.P. (2024), as well as policy directives on bail, the Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail and ordered his release on personal bond with conditions. The order also directed electronic transmission of the bail order to the jail and trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant, despite being charged with serious offences, is entitled to bail given the contradictory victim statements and lack of material against him.
- Whether the applicant’s alleged false implication warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 319
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 180, 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 323, 366, 376D, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- contradictory statements
- IPC offences
- overcrowded jails
- trial pendency
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Indian Evidence Act
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34023 of 2026
Ramshankar @ Biyaju
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sunil Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram
Kumar Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release
the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.06/2022, under sections-
120B, 366, 323, 504, 506, 376D I.P.C., Police Station- Mosanagar,
District- Kanpur Dehat, during the pendency of the trial.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that FIR was
lodged on 23.01.2022 wherein the allegation has been made that the
co-accused, Karan has enticed away the daughter of the first
informant and the applicant and three other co-accused had also
helped the co-accused, Karan. Thereafter, in her statement recorded
u/s 180 BNSS, the victim made specific allegation of kidnapping
against the co-accused Karan and Sandeep and the allegation
against the applicant was made that he also helped the co-accused,
Karan. However, in the statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS, the victim
changed her version and there was serious contradiction in the
statements recorded u/s 180 BNSS and u/s 183 BNSS. However,
police after investigation found that location of the present applicant
was not in Surat which was shown at the place of incident in the
statement of victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS. The chargesheet was
filed only against Karan. However, during the trial, an application u/s
319 Cr.P.C. was filed by the first informant and in that application,
applicant was also summoned on 28.03.2026, applicant has been
falsely implicated and there is no material against the applicant. The
specific allegation is against the co-accused Karan with whom the
victim was in relationship and she herself left the house. It is further
submitted that the applicant has explained the criminal history of
BAIL No. 34023 of 2026
2
three cases in the accompanying affidavit. The applicant is
languishing in jail since 27.07.2026. In case, he is granted bail, he will
not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial
proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view
the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and 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 as well as guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs.
State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant
of bail 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 present application is allowed.
6. Let the applicant- Ramshankar @ Biyaju, 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.
7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.
8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
BAIL No. 34023 of 2026
3
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
9. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as
well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
10. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis
of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded 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.
11. It is further 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.
12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant
through Jail Mati, Kanpur Dehat, 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 23, 2026
S.C.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM CHAURASIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…