Dismissed¶19

Parvez v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Oct 2025BAIL/33339/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Parvez v. State of U.P., Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 33339 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Court No. 65, Dr. Gautam Chowdhary, J. (decided October 9, 2025). Bail under Sections 69, 351(2) B.N.S. rejected; Crime No. 184 of 2025, P.S. Babugarh, District Hapur. Keywords: bail rejection; rape allegation; specific role; victim statements under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S.; delay in FIR (lodged 16.07.2025); co-accused Rizwan and Zubair dropped from charge sheet; altered offence; custody since 21.08.2025; A.G.A. Jai Kishan Chaurasia; counsel Mohd. Arshad.

What did the court decide?

On perusal of the record, the Court found that the applicant had been assigned a specific role of committing the offence, a version fully supported by the informant/victim in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S.

Parvez vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33339 of 2025

Parvez

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Mohd.	Arshad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 65

¶8

HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire material available on record.

¶10

The applicant- Parvez has filed the instant bail application with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.184 of 2025, under Sections 69, 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Babugarh, District Hapur, during the pendency of the trial.

¶11

The prosecution story in brief is that the informant's husband prior to her marriage was working as labour with the applicant, who was a contractor. On 15.06.2024, the applicant, co-accused Zubair and Rizwan came to her parental house and told him that her husband is not well as such she went away with them, on the way, the applicant committed rape with her, thereafter kept her in a room for long time and whenever she asked about her husband, they threatened and in the meantime, they also got her divorced from her husband and she is having pregnancy of five months from the applicant. It is also averred that the applicant has now brought his first wife and has ousted her from his house.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident is alleged to occurred between 15.06.2025 to 01.07.2025 whereas the F.I.R., has been lodged on 16.07.2025 without there being any plausible explanation of such an inordinate delay. He further submits that the prosecution case is false and concocted one and that no offence under Section 69, 351(2) of B.N.S., is made out against the applicant. Learned counsel further argued victim is a divorce lady and tkaing into the incident as alleged in the F.I.R., for the first time offence has been committed on 15.06.2024 but she did not raise any alarm and after a lapse of more than a year, the F.I.R. of the impugned case has been lodged without any credible evidence. Learned counsel has also argued that the name of the coaccused namely, Rizwan and Zubair have been dropped from the charge

¶13

BAIL No. 33339 of 2025

¶14

¶15

sheet whereas offence as against the applicant has also been altered. It is thus contended that no offence has been committed by the applicant and that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 21.08.2025. It is thus contended that the applicant is entitled for bail.

¶16

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State has contended that there is specific allegation against the applicant. He further submits that statement of the informant/victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of B.N.S., fully corroborates the prosecution story. He next submits that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶17

Perusal of the record shows that the applicant has been assigned specific role of committing the offence, which version is fully supported by the informant/victim in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of B.N.S.S.

¶18

Keeping in view submissions of learned counsel for the parties, gravity of offence, nature of allegations and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I do not find any good reason to exercise my discretion in favour of the accused-applicant.

¶19

Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected.

¶20

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

¶21

October 9, 2025 S.Ali

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Parvez v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parvez v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Amrish vs State of U.P.

Sahul vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Om Prakash vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gulshan vs State of U.P.

Teerath Lal vs State of U.P.

Tejpratap Alias Teju vs State of U.P. and 3 Others