Vinay Kumar vs State of U.P.

The instant application has been filed to enlarge the applicant on bail in case crime No. 85 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 115(2), 351(2) BNS, P.S. Reuna, District Kanpur Nagar.

¶11

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that though in the F.I.R. the allegation has been made against the applicant for enticing away the daughter of the first informant, the victim girl in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS, has specifically stated that she herself left her house, therefore, the applicant has not committed any offence. It is further submitted that charge sheet has been filed in the present case, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶12

It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 29.10.2025.

¶13

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶14

Thus, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

BAIL No. 43689 of 2025

¶16

2

¶17

Let the applicant- Vinay Kumar , involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶18

i. 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶20

iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶21

iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶23

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶24

The applicant shall be released on the basis of downloaded copy of this order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

¶25

It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant.

¶26

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023; гeported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.

¶27

December 10, 2025 Vandana

¶28

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- VANDANA GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinay Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Kumar 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raju Shukla vs State of U.P.

Naushad vs State of U.P.

Shrimati Devi vs State of U.P.

Mahendra vs State of U.P.

Raj Vishwakarma vs State of U.P.

Ashish @ Bhura vs State of U.P.