Allahabad High Court
SARDARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that, on a prima facie basis and given the victim's consent, the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The applicant Sardar was charged under Sections 333, 87, 69, 115(2), 352 and 351(3) of the Indian Penal Code for alleged offences arising from an incident at Banpur, Lalitpur. The victim, a 21‑year‑old woman, testified that she had travelled with the applicant voluntarily and gave no indication of coercion, thereby indicating consent. The applicant pleaded innocence, argued that he had been falsely implicated, and offered to cooperate with the trial while furnishing bail. The State opposed bail but could not refute the claim of consent. Considering the prima facie nature of the case, the victim’s consent, and the lack of any risk of tampering or intimidation, the court allowed bail with standard conditions. The applicant was released on personal bond and two sureties, subject to compliance with conditions and possible cancellation on breach.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under the IPC.
- Whether the victim's consent negates the necessity for continued detention.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 333, 351(3), 352, 69, 87
Subjects
- bail
- consent
- Indian Penal Code
- prima facie
- sureties
- criminal trial
- Section 183
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44615 of 2025
Sardar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kamala Kant Pandey, Shrawan Kumar
Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Hanuman Prasad Kushwaha
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.128 out of 269)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Shrawan Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Hanuman Prasad Kushwaha, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri
Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed
on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.261 of 2025, under Sections 333,
87, 69, 115(2), 352, 351(3) BNS, Police Station Banpur, District Lalitpur,
during the pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
victim is a consenting party as she travelled with the applicant to several
places, including Indore and had not raised any alarm whatsoever during the
said sojourn. The victim is major aged about 21 years. The criminal history
assigned to the applicant has been explained and he is languishing in jail
since 2.9.2025. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the
liberty of bail.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently
opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions made by
the counsel for the applicant.
BAIL No. 44615 of 2025
2
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183
B.N.S.S., which indicates her consent, 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.
7. Let the applicant- Sardar, 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.
8. 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
Vikas Verma
Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…