Allahabad High Court
ANOOP KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The bail application is allowed.
Summary
The applicant, Anoop Kumar, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 311 of 2025) under Sections 64, 123, 87 of the Indian Penal Code. The victim’s statement under Section 183 indicated she was a consenting party and had seen the applicant with her family before he fled the scene. The FIR was lodged after an eight‑day delay and there was no medical evidence to corroborate the incident. Considering these facts, the court found that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused given the delay in filing the FIR, lack of medical evidence, and the victim's statement indicating consent
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 123, 183, 64, 87
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Indian Penal Code
- delay in FIR
- victim consent
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46146 of 2025
Anoop Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajesh Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No. 184 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Rajesh Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, 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. 311 of 2025, under Sections 64,
123, 87 BNS, Police Station Bishalpur, District Pilibhit, during the pendency
of trial.
4. 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 u/s 183 BNSS, whereby
she seems to be consenting party as she has stated that she was seen with the
applicant by her family members, whereupon the applicant ran away from
the place of occurrence; the delay of eight days in lodging of FIR, there
being no medical corroboration of the incident 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. Accordingly, the bail application
is allowed.
5. Let the applicant- Anoop Kumar, 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
BAIL No. 46146 of 2025
2
subject to verification of sureties, with the condition that he shall not tamper
with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court
as required.
6. Breach of any of the above condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The
observation herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
April 23, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…