Allahabad High Court
SAJANversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sajan, accused in Crime No. 342 of 2025 under Sections 64, 352 and 351(2) of the B.N.S., alleging false implication and lack of incriminating material. The victim, a pregnant woman, had given statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S. that showed contradictions, and the applicant claimed she was a consenting party. The first informant opposed bail, asserting that the applicant, a married man, had fraudulently induced a relationship resulting in pregnancy. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI, Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P.) and the policy directive on bail, the court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to strict conditions. Accordingly, the bail application was allowed, with the applicant released on personal bond and two sureties, and detailed conditions imposed to prevent tampering or further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite the nature of the offences (Sections 64, 352, 351(2) of the B.N.S.) and the existence of contradictory victim statements.
- Whether the applicant's criminal history and alleged fraudulently induced relationship affect the risk of tampering or re‑offending.
- Whether prison overcrowding and pendency of cases justify the grant of bail under the cited Supreme Court guidelines.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 180, 183, 351(2), 352, 64
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- consent
- pregnancy
- criminal history
- jail overcrowding
- Supreme Court guidelines
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45400 of 2025
Sajan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashish Kumar Pandey, Jagjeet Singh
Yadav, Subodh Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ravi Prakash Mishra
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant and counter
affidavit filed on behalf of the first informant are taken on record.
2. Heard Shri Ashish Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant,
Shri Ravi Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the first informant and Shri
S.D. Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 342 of 2025, under Sections 64, 352,
351(2) of B.N.S., Police Station Colonalganj, District Allahabad during
the pendency of the trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case though there is no
incriminating material against him. It is further submitted that the victim
is a major lady and on perusal of the statement of the victim recorded
under Section 180 BNSS, it appears that she is a consenting party. It is
further submitted that there are material contradictions in the statement of
the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS and she has been
found to be pregnant. It is further submitted that the applicant is having
criminal history of one case, which has been duly explained in the
supplementary affidavit filed today and the applicant has been
languishing in jail since 21.10.2025, in case, he is granted bail, he will not
misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
BAIL No. 45400 of 2025
2
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A.
have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted by
them that the applicant being already married and entered into physical
relationship with the victim by playing fraud, as a result of which, the
victim became pregnant.
6. As per first information report, the applicant is said to have established
physical relationship with the victim, as a result of which, she became
pregnant and on perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under
Section 180 BNSS, it appears that she is a consenting party. It is further
submitted that there are material contradictions in the statement of the
victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS and she has been
found to be pregnant. It is further submitted that the applicant is having
criminal history of one case, which has been duly explained in the
supplementary affidavit filed today and the applicant has been
languishing in jail since 21.10.2025.
7. 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.
8. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED.
9. Let the applicant- Sajan 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
BAIL No. 45400 of 2025
3
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.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground
for cancellation of bail.
11. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as well
as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
12. 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.
13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
Jail Superintendent, Allahabad (Prayagraj) via e-mail or e-prison portal
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.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
September 9, 2026
RKM
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…