Allowed

Rohit Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2025BAIL/36701/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Considering the nature of accusations and supporting evidence, the court held that a case for bail was made out and granted release on bond and sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The accused-applicant released on personal bond and two reliable sureties executable in the like amount, subject to conditions.

Rohit Kumar vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36701 of 2025

¶3

Rohit Kumar

¶4

				.....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.- 68

¶5

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶6

Heard Shri Gaurav Srivastav, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶7

This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Rohit Kumar, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 66 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 75, 319 (2), 308 (2), 205 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66-D of I.T. Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Meerut, during the pendency of the trial before the Court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 8.8.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that earlier there was consensual relationship was between applicant and victim, but on account of false promise of marriage, present case has been lodged after a considerable delay of 05 months. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is material contradiction in the FIR version as well as in the statement under Section 183 BNSS. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge sheet in this case has already been filed on 14.9.2025 and cognizance thereon has been taken on 30.9.2025. He has two cases of criminal antecedent, which have sufficiently been explained and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶9

BAIL No. 36701 of 2025

¶10

¶11

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶12

Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the accused-applicant, Rohit Kumar , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶15

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶16

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶17

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶18

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶19

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶20

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶21

November 3, 2025

¶22

Ravi Prakash

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rohit Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Irfan Alias Fana vs State of U.P.

Haider vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Umang Vashishtha vs State of U.P.

Sumit Singh vs State of U.P.

Bachcha Alias Habib vs State of U.P.

Satish Kumar vs State of U.P.