Allowed

Vahidujjma Ansari Alias Poonak Ansari v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Nov 2025BAIL/41504/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving allegations of enticing a woman and forcible sexual relations, finding it a fit case for bail despite the gravity of allegations and opposing arguments from the State.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties, subject to conditions regarding evidence, witnesses, and future conduct.

Vahidujjma Ansari Alias Poonak Ansari vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41504 of 2025

¶2

Vahidujjma Ansari Alias Poonak Ansari

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Dharmendra Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 65

¶8

HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

¶9

Shri Shabeena Begum, Advocate, has filed her vakalatnama on behalf of informant, which is taken on record.

¶10

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.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is named in the FIR along with his two brothers. The FIR was lodged by the victim herself on 21.08.2025 alleging therein that in the year, 2024, the applicant had enticed away her and kept her in his house and on the pretext of false promise of marriage he also established sexual relations with her forcibly. The applicant had also made physical relations with her by his two brothers, named in the FIR. When she complain pain the applicant administered her some medicines and got miscarriage her fetus and while keeping her he solemnized marriage with another woman and thereafter expelled her from his house. In her statements record under Sections 180 & 183 BNSS the victim has reiterated her version made in the FIR with further improvement that she is in relation with the applicant for three years. There are other material contradictions in both the statements of the victim with the version of FIR. Learned counsel further submits that as per the FIR version the alleged incident of enticing away the victim by the applicant took place in the year 2024, whereas, the applicant had solemnized marriage with the victim on 19.12.2024 and kept the victim as his wife, thereafter, with the consent of the victim the applicant performed another marriage on 22.12.2024 and kept his both wives, thereafter, the victim reached to her parental house and lodged the FIR on 21.08.2025. Learned counsel further submits that as per version of the victim she was in relations with the applicant for three years, but she does not make any complaint earlier. Marriage was also solemnized between them. The victim remained with the applicant for about three years and when applicant solemnized marriage with another woman the victim got

¶12

BAIL No. 41504 of 2025

¶13

¶14

aggrieved and lodged the present FIR with false and frivolous allegations. 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 22.08.2025, with no criminal history.

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

Let the applicant-Vahidujjma Ansari Alias Poonak Ansari, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 235 of 2025, under Sections 64, 89, 115(2), 87 of B.N.S., Police Station- Lohta, District- Varanasi, 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:

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

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.

¶24

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

¶25

November 25, 2025 Mustaqeem.

¶26

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

Vahidujjma Ansari Alias Poonak Ansari v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vahidujjma Ansari Alias Poonak Ansari 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

Amit Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arun Kumar Kesarwani Alias Nankau Keshari and 3 Others vs State of U.P.

Premlata vs State of U.P. and Another

Pappu vs State of U.P.

Deshraj Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pradumn Yadav vs State of U.P.