Harendra and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

The instant Bail Application under Section 430 (1) BNSS has been filed in the pending criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 24.02.2025 passed by Additional Session Judge/Fast Track Court, Court No.2, District-Bulandshahr, in S.T. No. 699 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 373 of 2018 under Sections 376, 342 IPC, Police StationSikandrabad, District-Bulandshahr.

¶14

By means of the present bail application, the appellants-applicants seek suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

¶15

It has been contended by learned counsel for the appellants that the prosecutrix was a married lady and had gone along with the appellant No. 1, Harendra, on her own will as she had estranged relationship with her husband. It has further been contended that the prosecutrix was a consenting party and remained in the company of the appellant No. 1, but marriage between them could not be solemnized, therefore, he has been falsely implicated in the instant matter.

¶16

Learned counsel for the appellants further contended that appellant No. 2, Mohit is the real brother of appellant No. 1 Harendra and has been falsely implicated. It has also been submitted that the appellants were on bail during trial and has not misused the liberty of bail. Since there is no likelihood of

¶17

CRLA No. 2060 of 2025

¶18

2

¶19

early hearing of the appeal in near future, the appellant may be released on bail in the pending appeal. Besides the above submissions, learned counsel for the appellant has also tried to touch upon at length the circumstances which led to the false implication of accuseds-appellants. The appellants are languishing in jail since 24.02.2025.

¶20

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶21

I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned judgment.

¶22

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, sentence awarded to the appellants, the evidence available on record and the findings recorded by the trial court thereon, appellants were on bail during trial but no allegations for misuse of the bail has been brought to the notice of the Court and there is no criminal history of the appellants, and the fact that the appeal may take some time for its final disposal, without further commenting on the merits of the case, I am inclined to release both the appellants on bail.

¶23

Let the appellants- applicants Harendra and Mohit be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1 Lac with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned.

¶24

Appellants shall deposit the half of the fine within 45 days of this order.

¶25

On acceptance of bail bonds and personal bonds, the concerned court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on record of this appeal.

¶26

Order on Appeal

¶27

List in due course in the daily cause list.

¶28

September 23, 2025 Aditya Tripathi

¶29

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

¶30

Digitally signed by :- ADITYA TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Harendra and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harendra and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Qamar Rizwan vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Abhinav Kulshreshtha and Another vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 2 Others

Sanju and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish Shukla vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Taimur Nisha vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deepak Alias Mulla vs State of U.P. and 3 Others