Saurabh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8492 of 2025

¶3

Saurabh

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 12

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶10

The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.215 of 2025, under Section 69, 92, 352, 351(3) BNS, Police Station Beniganj, District Hardoi.

¶11

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicant on the false pretext of marriage exploited the victim and when she became pregnant the applicant administered medicine for abortion. It is further alleged that on 07.05.2025 the applicant married another lady. The prosecution has also alleged that the applicant maintained a false relationship with the victim for the last 6–7 years.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. The victim is a major and married lady. It is further submitted that the victim was earlier married to one Satyendra @ Chhotu Tiwari on 26.04.2021. She had filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which was decreed on 23.01.2023, and the certified copy of the judgment is on record with the supplementary affidavit. The victim thereafter married another person, Kuldeep on 26.11.2022 during the subsistence of her first marriage. The marriage certificate has also been filed along with the supplementary affidavit. It is further submitted that a third marriage was performed with Manish, which has come on record in the statement of prosecution witness Arpit Mishra. On the basis of these facts, it

¶13

BAIL No. 8492 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

is contended that the victim is in the habit of falsely implicating persons, and the prosecution story that she was continuously exploited for 6–7 years is wholly false as she had already married thrice during the said period.

¶16

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that during medical examination, the victim was found pregnant.

¶17

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶18

On due consideration of the statements of the victim under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS; the overall prosecution story; and the facts that the applicant has no criminal antecedents; the charge-sheet has been filed; the applicant is in jail since 11.07.2025; the victim is admittedly a major and married, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court finds it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶19

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶20

Let the applicant Saurabh be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions:

¶21

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶22

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶23

(iii) 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.

¶24

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶25

BAIL No. 8492 of 2025

¶26

3

¶27

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the IPC (now Section 269 BNS).

¶28

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS)is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS).

¶29

September 8, 2025

¶30

Madhu D.R/P.S

¶31

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶32

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Saurabh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bhagwandeen Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Pankaj Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Chaman Kashyap Thru. Guardian His Father Sri Govind Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Saurabh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neetu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Jabaaz vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.