Sagar Alias Chhota vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30644 of 2025

Sagar Alias Chhota

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mahendra Pal Singh Gaur, Manish Kumar, Mohd Fahad, Naman Kishor Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 64

¶5

HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

¶6

1. List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Manish Kumar, 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 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Sagar @ Chhota, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 0238 of 2025, under Sections 64(2), 316(2), 352, 351(3) BNS, registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Muzaffarnagar.

¶9

The FIR of the matter was lodged on 14.07.2025 by the victim against the applicant alleging therein that she was married to Ajay @ Sanjay in the year 2016 and has three children from the said wedlock. Since last two years, the applicant who is the cousin of her husband entangled her in his love affair and on a false promise to marry sexually abused her. He has also taken jewellery and money from her but now he is refusing marrying her. Report be lodged and action be taken.

¶10

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 married major woman having children. It is submitted that the FIR has been lodged with vague allegations inasmuch as the date and time of the incident is missing therein. It is submitted that the relationship between the applicant and the victim was a consensual relationship since last two years on some discussion of marriage which could not materialize and then the present FIR has been lodged. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 7 of the affidavit and is in jail since 17.07.2025.

¶11

BAIL No. 30644 of 2025

¶12

2

¶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 married major woman having children. The relationship between the victim and the applicant was since last two years on some discussion of marriage between them. The factum of marriage could not materialize and then 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 Sagar @ Chhota , 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) 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.

¶22

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to

¶23

BAIL No. 30644 of 2025

¶24

3

¶25

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

Sagar Alias Chhota v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sagar Alias Chhota 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

Azeem vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhinesh vs State of U.P.

Rizwan Ali vs State of U.P.

Shashi Kumar vs State of U.P.

Sunil vs State of U.P.

Arjun Singh vs State of U.P. and Another