Firoz Ansari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 185 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 127(2) BNS, Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Surauli, District Deoria during pendency of the trial.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is innocent and on the basis of false allegation he has been made accused in the present matter.

¶12

He further submits, however, victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS stated that applicant committed rape upon her and in her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS also she stated that applicant forcibly made physical relationship with her but from her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS it reflects, applicant and victim both were having affair and therefore story narrated by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS appears to be false.

¶13

He further submits, victim is not a literate girl and as per ossification test report she was about 16 years of age and therefore at this stage it cannot be said that she was below 18 years of age.

¶14

He further submits, actually victim and applicant was having affair and

¶15

BAIL No. 41890 of 2025

¶16

2

¶17

when this fact was revealed to the informant then he lodged the FIR of the present case and due to instigation of her parents victim made allegation of rape against applicant.

¶18

He further submits, applicant is aged about 22 years and he is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 26.09.2025 i.e. for last more than five months.

¶19

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶20

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶21

However, victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS stated that applicant committed rape upon her and even in the statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS she stated that applicant forcibly made physical relationship with her but from the statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS it also reflects, victim and applicant were having friendship and considering the statement of victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS, the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant with regard to false implication of the applicant cannot be ruled out at this stage.

¶22

Further, victim is not literate girl and as per CMO certificate she was about 16 years of age and considering this fact, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that at this stage it cannot be said that victim is below 18 years of age as in the age disclosed in her ossification test report there may be margin of two years either side.

¶23

Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 26.09.2025 i.e. for last more than five months.

¶24

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶25

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶26

Let the applicant - Firoz Ansari be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶27

BAIL No. 41890 of 2025

¶28

3

¶29

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶30

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶31

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶32

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶33

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶34

March 18, 2026 AK Pandey

¶35

(Sameer Jain,J.)

¶36

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Firoz Ansari v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Firoz Ansari v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Aslam Ansari vs State of U.P.

Waseem Shaikh @ Pintu vs State of U.P.

Abhimanyu Urf Annu vs State of U.P.

Amarnath Sharma Alias Babbu vs State of U.P.

Gulab Thakur vs State of U.P.

Chinta Devi vs State of U.P.