Sheru Khan Alias Yash Chauhan vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40294 of 2025

Versus Sheru Khan Alias Yash Chauhan	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Anil Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶3

Court No. - 65

¶4

HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

¶5

Shri Rahul Kumar Sharma, Advocate, has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of informant, which is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the FIR as well as in her statements recorded under Sections 180 & 183 BNSS the victim has alleged that one year earlier the applicant had committed her rape forcibly, thereafter, he committed her rape several times and also made such video clip of the victim and extended threats that he will viral such videos and o0n 16.08.2025 at about 5:00 p.m . he dragged her to his house after pulling her from E-Rickshaw where applicant and his father had given her threats to solemnize marriage with the applicant. Learned counsel further submits that no such video is on record to show the complicity of applicant. The victim has not mentioned any date or time of the first incident alleged occurred with her. As alleged, the last incident when the applicant dragged the victim in his house after pulling her from E-Rickshaw took place on 16.08.2025 whereas the FIR has been lodged on 21.08.2025 after a delay of more than four days without there being any plausible explanation of such an inordinate delay. The driver of such E-Rickshaw in his statement before the police has specifically stated that on the alleged date he was carrying the victim along with her children in his E-Rickshaw, when his E-Rickshaw reached in front of

¶8

BAIL No. 40294 of 2025

¶9

2

¶10

house of one Brajmohan, then the applicant got stopped his E- Rickshaw and both the applicant and the victim started talking with each other, then suddenly Brajmohan and his wife came outside their house, thereafter, dispute arose and scuffle broke out, thereafter, victim went to her mother's house on his E- Rickshaw. Thus, learned counsel submits that as per the statement of driver of E-Rickshaw no such incident took place as has been alleged by the prosecution. As per version of the victim the applicant was continuously committing her rape for one year but she has never made any complaint against her sexual assault by the applicant. Thus, it appears that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case with malafide intention and 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 the applicant is in jail since 04.09.2025, with no criminal history.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have 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.

¶12

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.

¶13

Let the applicant-Sheru Khan Alias Yash Chauhan, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 296 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 115(2), 351(2), 127(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Hathras Gate, District- Hathras, 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:

¶14

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶15

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

¶16

BAIL No. 40294 of 2025

¶17

3

¶18

court.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

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.

¶22

November 17, 2025

¶23

Mustaqeem.

¶24

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

¶25

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

Sheru Khan Alias Yash Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheru Khan Alias Yash Chauhan 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

Similar cases

Om Prakash Sharma Alias Tadakuwa vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nikhil Gaud vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gaurav vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rampal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Naushad vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ashraf vs State of U.P. and 3 Others