Zeeshan Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88916

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15807 of 2025

Applicant :- Zeeshan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Sahu Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Sahu, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.109 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Bhamora, District Bareilly, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed rape with the victim by finding her alone in the house of one Khalil on 09.03.2025 at about 1:00 p.m.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about eight hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is major obviously as she is a married lady and the applicant himself is a married person. The place of occurrence speaks volume of consent of the victim as none was present in the house of Khalil, whereby, the said offence is stated to have been committed by the applicant.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.03.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence

¶14

on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of the FIR and there being no medical corroboration of the incident coupled with the fact that the victim seems to be a consenting party, 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 .

¶15

Let the applicant- Zeeshan , 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.

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 26.5.2025 (Ravi Kant)

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Zeeshan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zeeshan 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases