Allahabad High Court
PRIYANSHU JAISAWALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The Court held that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail and therefore granted bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a second bail application filed by Priyanshu Jaisawal in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41200 of 2025. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR, was falsely implicated, and that key prosecution witnesses had turned hostile after cross‑examination. The State opposed bail but could not refute the applicant’s submissions. The Court noted the lack of direct accusation, the hostile witnesses, and the applicant’s clean record, and concluded that prima facie the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, the Court ordered his release on personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions, without prejudice to the trial on merits.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting bail to an accused who is not named in the FIR but is implicated during investigation?
- Does the turning hostile of key prosecution witnesses affect the bail eligibility of the accused?
- Can bail be granted under the multiple statutory provisions cited (IPC, POCSO Act, ITPA) despite the seriousness of the alleged offences?
Legislation cited
- Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act — s. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9
- Indian Penal Code — s. 111 BNS, 127(3), 3(5), 351(3), 61(2), 70(2), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 5(g), 6
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- hostile witnesses
- false implication
- IPC
- POCSO Act
- ITPA
- high court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41200 of 2025
Priyanshu Jaisawal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Kumar Shukla, Akhilesh
Chandra Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sadhana Dubey
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.115 out of 269)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on
record. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has
been served on 08.12.2025.
2. Heard Sri Abhishek Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms.
Sadhana Dubey, learned counsel for the High Court Legal Service
Committee, Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and
perused the material placed on record.
3. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first one
was dismissed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
05.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.18275 of 2025.
4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.20 of 2025, under Sections 87,
70(2), 127(3), 351(3), 3(5), 61(2), 111 BNS, Section 5(g)/6 POCSO Act and
Section 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, Police Station
Shahpur, District Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is not
named in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in the present case. His
name has come up during investigation. PW-1, PW-2, PW-5, PW-6 and PW-
7 have been examined during the trial, and they have completely resiled
from their earlier statements and have been cross-examined by the Public
Prosecutor after being declared hostile. There is no likelihood of the
BAIL No. 41200 of 2025
2
applicant’s conviction in the present case. The applicant has no criminal
history and is in jail since 20.03.2025. He is ready to cooperate with the trial
and undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail if released.
6. Learned counsel for the High Court Legal Service Committee and learned
A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute
the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration that the applicant is not named in the FIR and PW-1, PW-2,
PW-5, PW-6 and PW-7 have turned hostile, and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that
the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant- Priyanshu Jaisawal, be released on bail on furnishing
a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned,
subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not
tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the
trial court as required.
9. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 14, 2026
(Ravi Kant)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…