Sunil Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30638 of 2025

Sunil

				.....Applicant(s)
		Versus
State of U.P.				.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Gaurav Srivastav	Srivastav, a	Rajesh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.
Court No.- 64

¶4

HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

¶5

1. List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Gaurav Srivastav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Sunil, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 250 of 2025, under Sections 74, 78, 352, 351(2), 115(2), 64(1), 127(1), 76 BNS, registered at Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Agra.

¶8

The FIR of the matter was lodged on 19.05.2025 by the victim against the applicant alleging therein that she is aged about 32 years. The applicant has been torturing her mentally and physically. He used to visit her neighbour and chase her in an intoxicated condition and has many times enraged her modesty. He threatened her that if she does not become friend he would commit suicide by writing her name due to which she got terrified and gave her mobile number. He then entangled her in his love affair and clicked her objectionable photos and video and physically exploited her many times. On 13.05.2025 at about 10:00 pm he took her in a hotel where he assaulted her and committed rape upon her. Report be lodged and action be taken.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the victim is a major woman. It is submitted that the applicant and the victim were in relationship since long and no complaint whatsoever was made by her earlier to the police or any of the authorities. It is submitted that subsequently when the relationship between the victim and the applicant become sour the present FIR has been lodged. It is further submitted that the victim was medically examined and the doctor did not find any injury

¶10

BAIL No. 30638 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

on her person. It is submitted that no such video or photo has been recovered during investigation, para 20 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court. It is further submitted that the FIR in the matter was lodged under Sections 74, 78, 352, 351(2), 115(2) BNS but during investigation Sections 64(1), 127(1) and 76 of BNS has been added. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 26 of the affidavit and is in jail since 07.07.2025.

¶13

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶14

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the victim is a major woman. The relationship between the victim and the applicant was carrying on since long. No complaint was made by her or her parents earlier. Subsequently after much belated stage the FIR has been lodged.

¶15

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶16

Let the applicant Sunil , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶17

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶18

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶19

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶20

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 2023.

¶21

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3)

¶22

BAIL No. 30638 of 2025

¶23

3

¶24

recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS, 2023.

¶25

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶26

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶27

The bail application is allowed .

¶28

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶29

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶30

September 9, 2025 M. ARIF

¶31

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil 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