Amit Vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30587 of 2025

¶3

Amit

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Tripathi, Vinod Kumar Tirpathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 66

¶7

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶9

This bail application under Section 483 BNS has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Amit , seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 278 of 2025, under Sections 65 (1), 351 (3) BNS, Police Station Dhampur, District Bijnor.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 27.04.2025. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail.

¶11

The allegation made in the FIR is that the applicant and co-accused forcibly took away the victim in the field of sugarcane and committed rape upon her on knife point and also torn her clothes.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per the medical examination report there is no mark of injury seen all over the body and private parts of the victim. There are several contradictions in the FIR version and in the statement of the first informant and the statement of the victim. In her statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS, the victim has assigned the role of catching hold and pulling her into the sugarcane field

¶13

BAIL No. 30587 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

and no sexual assault had been committed upon her. However, in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS, she has alleged rape committed upon her. The medical report also belie the prosecution version. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶16

Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶17

Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

¶18

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the accused-applicant, Amit involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶20

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶21

ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶22

iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶23

iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶24

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶25

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶26

September 24, 2025

¶27

v.k.updh.

¶28

Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amit v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit 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