Savej Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35978 of 2025

Savej

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mukesh Chandra Gupta, Shubham Prakash Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 65

¶5

HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is named in the F.I.R. along with seven other accused persons. The F.I.R. alleges that all the accused named in the F.I.R. took minor daughter of the informant forcibly. When the victim was recovered her statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S. was recorded wherein she has stated that on the alleged date of incident on being annoyed with her father she left her house on her own and reached at Meerut in relations who send her to her home again, thus, she has not made any allegation against any person. When her statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S. was recorded she developed the story and has stated that by intoxicating her the applicant took her to Mathura, where three persons committed her rape. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that in the medical examination of the victim no internal or external injury was found on her person, no sign of force was found on her private part, and doctor has opined that sexual violence cannot be ruled out and final opinion has been reserved pending availability of FSL reports, but such FSL report is not on the record till date and the age of the victim was found to be about 18 years. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that since there are material contradictions in both the statements of the victim and there is no definite opinion of the doctor about sexual assault of the victim and FSL report is on the record, thus it appears that applicant has falsely been implicated in the case. 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 24.06.2025, having no criminal history.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶9

BAIL No. 35978 of 2025

¶10

2

¶11

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant-Savej, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 141 of 2025, under Sections 64, 87 of B.N.S., Police Station- Mundali, District- Meerut, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶14

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶15

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶16

iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶17

v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶19

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

¶20

October 30, 2025

¶21

Mustaqeem.

¶22

Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Savej v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savej 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