Kishan Chauhan vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:54311

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12159 of 2025

Applicant :- Kishan Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 35 of 2025, U/S 376, 506, 509 IPC and 66E/67A I.T. Act, Police Station Cholapur, District Varanasi, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

PROSECUTION STORY:

¶10

The applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim on 28.5.2024 and is stated to have recorded the said act on mobile. He is stated to have asked the victim to marry him and had even demanded certain money. On her refusal, the applicant is stated to have sent the said indecent video on the mobile of her brother.

¶11

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT:

¶12

The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence.

¶13

The FIR is delayed by about eight months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

¶14

The said video has not been sent by the applicant. Rather, the said number mentioned in the FIR was given by the applicant to the victim herself and it has been made viral just to keep the applicant behind bars. The victim is major, aged about 19 years.

¶15

The applicant is languishing in jail since 2.2.2024 having no criminal history and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶16

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/OPPOSITE PARTY:

¶17

The bail application has been opposed on the ground that there is a video, which was recovered by the investigating officer and was handed over by the brother of the victim, which was sent by the applicant, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail, as he has ruined the life of the victim.

¶18

CONCLUSION:

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the fact that the said video has been recovered and the trail connects the applicant to it, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶20

The bail application is, accordingly, rejected .

¶21

However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.

¶22

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶23

Order Date :- 15.4.2025 Shalini

¶24

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kishan Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishan Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rahul Sahani vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bhopendra Alias Bhopey vs State of U.P.

Shahnawaz vs State of U.P.

Vikram vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pooran Prasad vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Monu Alias Ajay vs State of U.P. and 3 Others