Dismissed¶15

Babi Kumar Alias Babbi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Jul 2025BAIL/20291/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application rejected at trial stage; Section 483 BNSS; Sections 376, 506 IPC; Section 67 I.T Act; rape and blackmail via nude photographs circulated on WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram; Case Crime No. 232 of 2024, P.S. Kerakat, District Jaunpur; FIR dated 23.06.2024; victim medically examined 25.06.2024; victim examined as PW-1, cross examination pending, incomplete statement not considered; applicant in jail since 24.06.2024; Allahabad High Court 2025 (2025:AHC:102561); Samit Gopal, J.

What did the court decide?

It is evident, after hearing the counsel and perusing the records, that the applicant is named in the FIR and in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. ¶13

Babi Kumar Alias Babbi Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Babi Kumar alias Babbi, accused in Case Crime No. 232 of 2024 (Sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 67 I.T Act, P.S. Kerakat, District Jaunpur), should be enlarged on bail during trial under Section 483 BNSS.

¶8

Court's answer

It is evident, after hearing the counsel and perusing the records, that the applicant is named in the FIR and in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

The cross examination of the victim is yet to conclude; she is being examined as PW-1 before the trial court.

¶13

Key takeaways

Considering the incomplete statement of the victim at this stage would not be in the fitness of things.ratio¶13
No ground for bail is made out; the court did not find it a fit case for bail.ratio¶13
Considering the totality of the case, in particular the nature of evidence available on record, the court was not inclined to release the applicant on bail.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 64; Samit Gopal, J.), by order dated 2.7.2025, rejected a Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 20291 of 2025 under Section 483 BNSS filed by Babi Kumar alias Babbi, an accused in Case Crime No. 232 of 2024 under Sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 67 I.T Act, P.S. Kerakat, District Jaunpur. The FIR dated 23.06.2024 alleged that the applicant obtained the victim's mobile number, threatened her, had physical relations with her, secretly clicked her nude photographs, and sent them to her brother, uncle, villagers and on WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram and social media, threatening murder of her brother and disrepute. The applicant's counsel argued false implication, a consensual relationship, a medical examination of 25.06.2024 indicating habituality to sexual intercourse, a delay of about five months in lodging the FIR, and commencement of trial with the victim partly examined as PW-1; the applicant was stated to be in jail since 24.06.2024 with no criminal history. The State opposed, noting the continuing cross examination, allegations in the FIR and investigation-stage statements, and recovery of the victim's photographs from the applicant's mobile. The court found the applicant named in the FIR and in the investigation statements, held that as the victim's cross examination was yet to conclude her incomplete statement could not be considered at this stage, found no ground for bail, and rejected the application; pending applications stood disposed of.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:102561

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20291 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Babi Kumar Alias Babbi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

1. List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant Babi Kumar @ Babbi , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 232 of 2024, under Sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 67 I.T Act, registered at P.S. Kerakat, District Jaunpur.

¶9

The FIR of the matter was lodged on 23.06.2024 by the victim against the applicant alleging therein that the applicant from somewhere got her mobile number and used to threaten her on it. On 10.01.2024 he came to her house at about 11:00 pm and established physical relationship with her and clicked her nude photographs secretly and then started threatening her and told her that whenever he calls her she has to come for establishing physical relationship with him due to which she was mentally disturbed. When he called her once but she did not go then he has sent her nude photographs to her brother, her uncle and other villagers on Whatsapp. He also called her on phone and sent nude photographs on her Whatsapp and threatened her repeatedly. He has also sent photographs through Facebook, Instagram and social media which are nude photos and threatened her of causing disrepute to her. He said that her marriage would not be solemnized anywhere. He threatens that he would murder her brother and no one would take any action against him since he has good contacts with the police.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that

¶11

the relationship between the applicant and the victim was a consensual relationship. It is submitted that the victim was medically examined on 25.06.2024 and the doctor found her habitual to sexual intercourse thus there is no corroboration of allegation of rape through medical evidence. It is submitted that the FIR has been lodged after about five months of the said incident for which there is no plausible explanation given. It is submitted that the trial in the matter has started in which the statement of the victim has been recorded in part, copy of which is annexed as annexure 8 to the affidavit in which she has been examined as PW-1. It is submitted that in the said statement the victim states that she has not been shown photographs available on record. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 30 of the affidavit and is in jail since 24.06.2024.

¶12

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim is being cross examined in the trial and the cross examination is continuing. It is submitted that considering the said statement at the stage would not be in the fitness of things since her statement has not been recorded in full. It is submitted that the applicant is named in the FIR, in her statements of the victim recorded during investigation and there are allegations against him. It is submitted that the mobile of the applicant was collected during investigation in which photographs of the victim have been recovered. It is submitted that as such the prayer for bail of the applicant be rejected.

¶13

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is named in the FIR and in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. The cross examination of the victim is yet to conclude. She is being examined as PW-1 before the trial court. Considering incomplete statement at the stage would not be in the fitness of things. No ground for bail is made out. I do not find it a fit case for bail.

¶14