Dismissed¶15

Arvind v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2026BAIL/5481/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail rejected; rape of minor daughter by father; victim aged about 13 years; pregnancy and childbirth; defence plea of relationship with one Gulraj; third bail application; custody since 25.08.2020 (about 5.5 years); victim and witness statements recorded; trial expedition direction of 8 months; Allahabad High Court; Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5481 of 2026; Raj Beer Singh, J.; decided 19 March 2026.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the applicant; bail refused. Trial court directed to expedite and conclude the trial preferably within 8 months; copy of order to be transmitted to the trial court for compliance. ¶15

Arvind vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5481 of 2026

¶3

Arvind

¶4

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State Of U.P. And 3 Others		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Harish Chandra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 91

¶6

HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is father of the victim girl and the allegation of rape levelled against the applicant is not probable. It was submitted that in fact the victim was having relation with one Gulraj and she has conceived pregnancy with said relationship. It has further been submitted that while rejecting the second bail application of the applicant vide order dated 17.9.2024, the trial court was directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible but trial has not been concluded so far. However, the statement of victim and other witnesses have been recorded. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.8.2020 and he has already undergone custody about 5 and 1/2 years. Lastly, it was submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the application and submitted that at the time of incident the victim was minor, aged about 13 years, and that the applicant is father of the victim and he has committed rape on her, due to which she has suffered pregnancy and gave birth to the child.

¶10

Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the applicant is father of the victim, this Court is

¶11

BAIL No. 5481 of 2026

¶12

¶13

not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

¶14

However, considering the period of custody of the applicant, trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 8 months from the date of receipt the copy of this order.

¶15

With the above observation, the third bail application of the applicant is hereby rejected.

¶16

Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the trial court concerned for necessary compliance.

¶17

(Raj Beer Singh,J.)

¶18

March 19, 2026

¶19

Gss

¶20

Digitally signed by :- GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arvind v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mansoor Ansari vs State of U.P.

Kishanpal Singh vs State of U.P.

Avtar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Jagdish vs State of U.P.

Mulayam Singh Yadav vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Yaseen @ Lakhan vs State of U.P.