Bittu Kumar vs State of U.P.

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.35 of 2026, under Sections 137(2), 87 of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station- Geeda, District- Gorakhpur.

¶10

The Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has not abducted the victim. A false recovery from the possession of the applicant has been shown. The victim was not recovered from the possession of the applicant. The Learned counsel for the applicant has further contended that the victim, having been beaten by her mother, left her house in a fit of anger and no sexual assault was made on the victim by the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history and he is in jail since 28.1.2026. A charges-sheet has now been submitted and the applicant is no longer required for any custodial interrogation or recoveries.

¶11

The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and has contended that specific allegations of enticing away the victim and then sexually assaulting her on a promise of marriage have been levelled against the applicant by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS. The victim is aged about 15 years and no justification has been given by the applicant for his false implication.

¶12

BAIL No. 15289 of 2026

¶13

2

¶14

I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.

¶15

A perusal of the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 & 183 BNSS shows serious contradictions. In her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS, the victim has stated that she lived with the applicant in Bihar as husband and wife and had also established physical relations with him. However, in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS, the victim has denied the establishment of any physical relations. She has introduced one Kajal as the person, who had told her to run away with the applicant. The victim has refused for her medical examination. The applicant has no criminal antecedents.

¶16

Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above, period of detention of the applicant and the lack of criminal antecedents, I deem it fit to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶17

The bail application is allowed .

¶18

Let the accused-applicant- Bittu Kumar , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶19

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶20

ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶21

iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶22

iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

¶23

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶24

BAIL No. 15289 of 2026

¶25

3

¶26

It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded 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.

¶27

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.

¶28

(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)

¶29

May 6, 2026 Sachin

¶30

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bittu Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bittu 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sunita Devi Vs State of U.P.

Asif @ Asiv Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Asif @ Asiv vs State of U.P.

Kako @ Kafia vs State of U.P.

Jagpal Singh Vs State of U.P.