Dinesh Srivas vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Dinesh Srivas vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted: applicant Dinesh Srivas to be released on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned (sureties to be verified before release), subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence, not pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses, and appearing before the trial court on dates fixed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Dinesh Srivas is entitled to bail during the pendency of trial in Case Crime No. 226 of 2024 under Sections 74, 331(4), 64 of BNS, Police Station Panvadi, District Mahoba.

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, submissions of counsel, evidence on record, and the settled law of the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI and Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the applicant has made out a case for bail.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the sureties to be verified before issuance of the release order.

Key takeaways

Bail is subject to conditions: the applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial, shall not pressurise/intimidate prosecution witnesses, and shall appear before the trial court on dates fixed; breach of any condition shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.ratio¶17
Observations made in granting bail shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.obiter¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail allowed — Offences under Sections 74, 331(4) and 64 of BNS (Case Crime No. 226 of 2024, P.S. Panvadi, Dist. Mahoba). Prosecution case: applicant allegedly barged into the informant's house using a ladder and outraged the modesty of his daughter at about 00:15 hours on 14.09.2025 (as printed); allegations were escalated to rape in the victim's statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS. Defence urged an unexplained delay of about one day in the FIR, the victim's majority (aged about 21 years per FIR), absence of medical corroboration and of any criminal history, and custody since 14.11.2024; the State Law Officer opposed but could not dispute the absence of criminal history. Relying on the settled law of the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022 INSC 690) and Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement (2024 INSC 595), and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court held the applicant had made out a case for bail: release on a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence, no intimidation of witnesses, attendance at trial), breach being a ground for cancellation; observations not to affect the trial court's independent assessment.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57398

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5015 of 2025

Applicant :- Dinesh Srivas Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

List has been revised.

Heard Sri Narendra Kumar Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Sri Chandra Prakash Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record.

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 226 of 2024, under Sections 74, 331(4), 64 of BNS, Police Station - Panvadi, District - Mahoba, during the pendency of trial.

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have barged into the house of the informant by using a ladder and had outraged the modesty of his daughter in the night of 14.09.2025 at about 00:15 hours.

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

Learned counsel has also stated that the allegations mentioned in the FIR have been escalated to that of rape by the victim in her statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS. The said statement has been made after due deliberations and legal consultations. The victim is major aged about 21 years as per the FIR. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

Let the applicant- Dinesh Srivas , who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

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

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

Order Date:- 18.4.2025 Siddhant

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad