Jitendra Kumar vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32609 of 2025

Jitendra Kumar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) :	Kamlesh Kumar	Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :	G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 64

¶6

HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

¶7

1. List revised.

¶8

Heard Sri Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶9

This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Jitendra Kumar, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 167 of 2025, under Section 69 BNS, registered at Police Station Jangipur, District Ghazipur.

¶10

The FIR of the matter was lodged on 19.08.2025 by the victim against the applicant alleging therein that they used to talk to each other and the applicant proposed to marry her. On the said promise he established physical relationship with her whenever her marriage gets fixed he used to interfere and get it cancelled. He one day told her that she may not fear as he is with her and further stated that she should run with him otherwise he would die. He took her and then they after roaming came back and then left her away and told her that he would marry her on Monday. When she asked him to marry he refused. Report be lodged and action be taken.

¶11

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 aged about 28 years. It is submitted that the relationship between the victim and the applicant was going on since the year 2021 and in between there was no complaint whatsoever made by her to any authorities. It is submitted that the said relationship was a consensual relationship on some discussion of marriage between them which could not materialize and thus the FIR has been lodged. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 18 of the affidavit and is in jail since 20.08.2025.

¶12

BAIL No. 32609 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

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

¶15

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the victim is a major woman aged about 28 years. The relationship between the applicant and the victim was continuing since the year 2021 without any complaint whatsoever. There was some discussion of marriage between them which could not materialize and then the FIR has been lodged.

¶16

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.

¶17

Let the applicant Jitendra Kumar , 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:-

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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.

¶23

BAIL No. 32609 of 2025

¶24

3

¶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 23, 2025 M. ARIF

¶31

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

Jitendra Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra 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

Sandeep vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rahul Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandan Kapoor vs State of U.P.

Zubair vs State of U.P.

Asharful Islam vs State of U.P.

Vijendra Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others