YUSUFversusSTATE OF U.P.

    HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
    CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9128 of 2026

Yusuf
                                                 .....Applicant(s)
                             Versus

State of U.P.
                                                     .....Opposite
                                                           Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Aditya Prasad Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Manish Kumar Singh

Court No. - 65
        HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

1. Heard Aditya Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the
applicant, Sri V.M.Zaidi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by
Sri Manish Kumar Singh, Sri Chandan Singh, learned A.G.A.
for the State, Sri Kuldeep Tripathi learned counsel for the
informant, and perused the entire material available on record.

2. The applicant-Yusuf has filed the instant bail application
with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.528 of 2025,
under Sections 351 (2), 123, 64(1) of B.N.S., Police Station
Kandhla, District Shamli, during the pendency of the trial.

3. The prosecution story is that the informant/victim is divorcee
lady residing with her children and one of her child was ill
since last six months as such she was acquainted with occultist-
applicant, who used to practice exorcisms and "tantric rituals"
under the guise of treatment. It is further averred that under the
pretext of treating her child, the applicant visited her house and
misled her into that some hidden treasure buried in her house
and that the applicant claimed that he could extract the same by
using his tantric powers. As such, he continued performing
these rituals at my home for several days. It has also been
averred that on 31.12.2025 between 02:30 P.M. to 03:00 P.M.,
the applicant took her to Kandhla graveyard on his motorcycle
under the pretext of further treatment for her child and she
                                                   BAIL No. 9128 of 2026
                          2


accompanied her to the graveyard and nearby orchard, another
person was present, whom the applicant claimed that he is an
assistant to him. The applicant gave some suspicious substance
to drink upon consuming it, she became semi-consciousness.
Taking advantage of same, the outraged her modesty. When
she resisted and raised alarm, nearby person came to the place
and on seeing them, the applicant and the co-accused fled away
giving threatening to kill her.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident is
alleged to have occurred at about 14:30 hours of 31.12.2025,
whereas the F.I.R. has been lodged on the same day at about
21:21 hours without there being any plausible explanation of
such delay. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended
prior to lodging of the F.I.R. of the instant case, the victim had
earlier filed an application under Section 173(4) of B.N.S.S. in
the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat against the
applicant and three unknown persons with regard to
commission of rape. It has also been alleged in the said
application that on 07.08.2025, the applicant along with
associates came to her house and had shown her obscene video,
thereafter they went away giving threatening to her however,
the application was dismissed in default vide order dated
22.01.2026, copy of application under Section 173(4) of
B.N.S.S. as well as order dated 22.01.2026 are annexed as
Annexure-8 and 9 to the affidavit accompanying the bail
application. Learned counsel further argued that the marriage
of son of the applicant namely Arshad Qureshi was solemnised
with Mantasha daughter of Hazi Qasim, and between the
couple matrimonial discord arose on account of which, the
brother of the bride lodged a F.I.R. against the applicant and
his family members in Case Crime No. 199 of 2025. Learned
counsel further argued that when in-laws of applicant's son
came to know that an application under Section 173 (4) of
B.N.S.S. was filed by the victim at Baghpat, they made a
device to the informant's to lodge an F.I.R. of the instant case.
Learned counsel further argued that the application under
                                                   BAIL No. 9128 of 2026
                          3


Section 173(4) of B.N.S.S., was filed with respect to the
incident of rape alleged to have committed by the applicant in
the month of August 2025, whereas in the F.I.R. of the instant
case, the victim has described the incident alleged to have
taken place in the month of December 2025 wherein it has
stated that the victim/informant had accompanied the applicant
on a motor to a graveyard, where the offence has been
committed, which cannot be believed by a man of ordinary
prudence for the reasons that once rape has been committed by
the applicant in the month of August 2025 then it would be
highly improbable that she would accompany the applicant to
anywhere. It is thus contended that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case at the behest of in-laws of
the applicant's son. Apart from the aforesaid submissions,
learned counsel also argued that the medical evidence does not
corroborate with the prosecution version. It is thus contended
that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present
case due to ulterior motive. Several other submissions in order
to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the
applicant have also been placed before the Court. The
circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false
implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has
also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to
cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make
himself available before the court whenever required and is
also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may
deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is
languishing in jail since 21.01.2026. Learned counsel thus
argued that the applicant is entitled for bail.

5. On the other hand, Sri V.M.Zaidi, learned Senior Counsel
for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have drawn
attention of this Court to the recovery memo pertaining to
video and on seeing the video, it was found that the victim was
sitting in a nude position, which has been kept in a pendrive.
The said video has been certified under Section 65-B of the
Evidence Act. It is thus contended that there is specific
                                                                                          BAIL No. 9128 of 2026
                                                                 4


                                        allegation against the applicant and that the innocence of the
                                        applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he
                                        does not deserve any indulgence.

                                        6. Perusal of the record shows that the applicant has been
                                        assigned specific role which has also been supported by the
                                        victim in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183
                                        of B.N.S.S. Apart from the same, there is a certification under
                                        Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act. The applicant, who
                                        alleged himself to be occultist and behind the said occultism,
                                        the applicant is committing heinous offence against the society,
                                        therefore I do no find any good reason to exercise my
                                        discretion in favour of the accused-applicant.

                                        7. Keeping in view submissions of learned counsel for the
                                        parties, gravity of offence, nature of allegations and all the
                                        attending facts and circumstances of the case, without
                                        expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the bail
                                        application of the applicant-Yusuf stands rejected.

                                                                          (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

                                        March 18, 2026
                                        S.Ali




Digitally signed by :-
SHAUKAT ALI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad