Allahabad High Court
SURJEET KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
Considering the victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS indicating no enticement, the accused is entitled to bail.
Summary
Surjeet Kumar applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 150 of 2026) filed under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the BNS. He contended that the FIR, lodged by the victim's father, falsely implicated him for enticement, and the victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS affirmed that she voluntarily left home, married the accused, and was not sexually assaulted or enticed. The accused has no prior criminal record and has been in custody since 26 June 2026. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after reviewing the victim’s statement, held that the accused is entitled to bail and, without addressing the merits of the case, granted bail on personal bond and sureties, citing Supreme Court precedents on bail policy.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused, Surjeet Kumar, is entitled to bail despite the FIR alleging enticement under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the BNS.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 137(2), 183, 87
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- victim statement
- Section 183 BNSS
- personal bond
- sureties
- Uttar Pradesh criminal law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34668 of 2026
Surjeet Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Harendra Yadav, Prabhat Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Mohd. Saqlain, learned advocate, holding the brief, appears
for the accused applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Surjeet Kumar to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 150 of 2026,
under Sections 137(2), 87 of BNS, P.S.- Gajner, 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 20.6.2026
lodged by father 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 to Gurgaon where she solemnized marriage with the
accused applicant. 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 26.6.2026. 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. 34668 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 29, 2026
Krishna*
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…