Allahabad High Court
JAYPRAKASHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The bail application is allowed and the accused is released on bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Jayprakash, who is accused under IPC sections 69, 333, 115(2), 352 and 351(2) for allegedly entering into a false promise of marriage and subsequently refusing to fulfil it. The prosecution alleged that the applicant misled the victim, while the defence argued that the applicant is innocent, has no prior criminal record, and that the victim's age is 20, making the allegations unsubstantiated. The court examined the material evidence, the applicant's conduct since incarceration, and relevant Supreme Court precedents on bail. Relying on the principles laid down in Kunal Chatterjee, Pramod Suryabhan Pawar and Ansaar Mohammad, the court found that the applicant had made out a case for bail. Consequently, bail was granted subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions prohibiting evidence tampering, witness intimidation, and ensuring appearance before the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged false promise of marriage and offences under IPC sections 69, 333, 115(2), 352 and 351(2).
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses.
- Whether the applicant's right to liberty outweighs the seriousness of the alleged offences.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 333, 351(2), 352, 69
Subjects
- bail
- false promise of marriage
- Indian Penal Code
- evidence tampering
- witness intimidation
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45882 of 2025
Jayprakash
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Alok Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No.182 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Alok Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhishek
Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on
record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 338 of 2025, under Sections 69,
333, 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, Police Station Etmaddula, District Nagar
(Commissionerate Agra) during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established
corporeal relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage and
had later on refused to comply with the said promise.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He
has nothing to do with the said offence. As per ossification test report, the
age of the victim has come out to be 20 years. There is no clinching evidence
to suggest that the applicant misled the victim from the beginning. The
informant has converted a failed consensual physical relationship into a
criminal case.
6. Learned counsel has further stated that there is no criminal history of the
applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 2.11.2025 and he is ready
to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not
BAIL No. 45882 of 2025
2
misuse the liberty of bail.
7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the judgments of the Supreme Court passed in Kunal
Chatterjee vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. (Special Leave petition (Crl.)
No. 7004 of 2025), Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra
and Another, 2019 (9) SCC 608 and Ansaar Mohammad vs. State of
Rajasthan and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 886 and without expressing
any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the
applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
9. Let the applicant- Jayprakash, who is involved in aforementioned case
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 subject to
following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties
be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant
shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent
opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
April 23, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…