Tinku Kumar vs State of U.P.

The present second bail application has been filed by the applicantaccused in Case Crime No.0405 of 2022, under Section 376D I.P.C., Police Station- Quarsi, District- Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge the applicantaccused on bail.

¶13

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant-accused that applicant-accused is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It was submitted that the age of victim is about 18 years. Learned counsel has referred the statement of alleged eye-witness Smt. Renu and pointed out that there is material contradiction between her first statement and her supplementary statement and that her statement is quite improbable. Victim has not sustained any injury. It was submitted that the alleged incident has been shown of 06.05.2019 and the informant has lodged a missing report of victim on 09.05.2022 stating that while he along with his family members was at bus stand, the victim has gone missing.

¶14

It is further submitted that first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 16.02.2024 and trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and to decide the same preferably within a period of one year but trial has not been concluded so far. Statement of victim as well as of other material witnesses have been recorded before the trial Court. Learned counsel has referred statement of victim recorded before the trial Court and pointed out that there are material contradictions and infirmities in the

¶15

BAIL No. 16843 of 2025

¶16

2

¶17

statement of victim. The prosecution version regarding rape is not supported by medical examination report. Applicant has no criminal history. Lastly, it was submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 21.06.2022 and that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in trial.

¶18

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that victim is a mentally disturbed lady and she has made allegation of rape against applicant.

¶19

Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, period of detention and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits, a case for bail is made out.

¶20

The bail application is allowed .

¶21

Let the applicant - Tinku Kumar involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing each a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶22

i. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶23

ii. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate any of the prosecution witness.

¶24

iii. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶25

iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶26

v. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶27

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶28

October 8, 2025 'SP'/-

¶29

(Raj Beer Singh,J.)

¶30

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tinku Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tinku Kumar 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

Reeta Kumari and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Prem Prakash Tiwari and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Vivek Sharma vs State of U.P.

Deepak and Another vs State of U.P.

Gyanesh Kumar vs State of U.P.