Allowed¶6

Vijay Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC10 Jul 2026ABA/1227/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail made absolute; false promise of marriage; consensual physical relationship; Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352, 69 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023; FIR/Case Crime No. 0500 of 2024, Police Station Bazpur, Udham Singh Nagar; charge-sheet filed without arrest; ad-interim bail since 09.12.2024 without misuse; no fresh bail bonds; ABA/1227/2024; Uttarakhand High Court; Alok Mahra, J.; 10-07-2026; Vijay Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand.

What did the court decide?

Ad-interim anticipatory bail made absolute; applicant to continue on anticipatory bail subject to conditions imposed vide order dated 09.12.2024; no fresh bail bonds required. ¶6

Vijay Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand — Uttarakhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Ad-interim anticipatory bail made absolute; applicant to continue on anticipatory bail subject to conditions imposed vide order dated 09.12.2024; no fresh bail bonds required.

¶6

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, arraigned in Case Crime No. 0500 of 2024 (P.S. Bazpur) under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352 and 69 BNS 2023 for alleged physical relations on the false promise of marriage, is entitled to continued anticipatory bail by making absolute the ad-interim protection granted on 09.12.2024.

¶3

Court's answer

No useful purpose would be served by curtailing the applicant's liberty at this stage, having regard to: his enjoyment of ad-interim anticipatory bail since 09.12.2024 without misuse of liberty; his admitted relationship of more than six years with the informant and their prima facie consensual physical relationship; and the charge-sheet having been filed during investigation without his arrest being considered necessary.

¶6

Ratio / Principle

The ad-interim anticipatory bail granted vide order dated 09.12.2024 is made absolute, and the applicant shall continue on anticipatory bail subject to the conditions already imposed by that order.

¶6

Key takeaways

No fresh bail bonds are required, as the applicant has already furnished the requisite personal bond and sureties to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.ratio¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory Bail — Uttarakhand High Court (Single Bench), ABA/1227/2024, Alok Mahra, J., decided 10-07-2026: Applicant booked under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352 and 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Case Crime No. 0500 of 2024, P.S. Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar) for allegedly establishing physical relations with the complainant on the false promise of marriage and later refusing to marry her. Ad-interim anticipatory bail granted by the Coordinate Bench vide order dated 09.12.2024 made absolute. Court held no useful purpose would be served by curtailing the applicant's liberty, noting: (i) he had enjoyed ad-interim bail since 09.12.2024 without misuse; (ii) the applicant and informant were admittedly in a relationship for more than six years and their physical relationship was prima facie consensual; and (iii) the charge-sheet had been filed without arrest of the applicant being considered necessary. Conditions of the 09.12.2024 order continue to bind the applicant; no fresh bail bonds required as personal bond and sureties already furnished. Application disposed of.

¶1

UKHC010193002024

¶2

2026:UHC:5624

¶3

SL. No.	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS ABA/1227/2024 Vijay Kumar --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. Mohit Kumar, learned counsel for the complainant. 2. The applicant- Vijay Kumar, is before this Court seeking anticipatory bail in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 0500 of 2024, registered at Police Station Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352 and 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned State Counsel. Perused the record. 4. As per the allegations made in the FIR, the complainant was in a relationship with the applicant since March, 2018. It is alleged that the applicant, on several occasions, established physical relations with the complainant on the false promise of marriage. However, he subsequently refused to marry her, whereupon the present FIR came to be lodged. 5. The FIR also named other family members of the applicant. However, upon completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted the charge-sheet only against the present applicant. No material was found against the other named family members, and they were exonerated during the course of investigation. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was granted ad-interim anticipatory bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide orderdated 09.12.2024.Itisfurther

¶4

UKHC010193002024

¶5

2026:UHC:5624

¶6

submitted that the applicant has duly complied with all the conditions contained in the said order and has not misused the liberty so granted. It is, therefore, prayed that the ad-interim protection granted to the applicant be made absolute. 7. Learned State Counsel opposed the anticipatory bail application. 8. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, particularly the fact that the applicant has been enjoying the benefit of ad-interim anticipatory bail since 09.12.2024 without any misuse of liberty; that the applicant and the informant were admittedly in a relationship for more than six years and their physical relationship was prima facie consensual; and that during the pendency of the investigation, the charge-sheet has already been filed without the arrest of the applicant being considered necessary, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by curtailing the liberty of the applicant at this stage. 9. Accordingly, the ad-interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 09.12.2024 is hereby made absolute. The applicant shall continue to remain on anticipatory bail subject to the conditions already imposed by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2024. There shall be no requirement of furnishing fresh bail bonds, as the applicant has already furnished the requisite personal bond and sureties to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. 10. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. (Alok Mahra, J.) 10-07-2026 SB

Vijay Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand

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

Parikshit Chaudhary Vs State of Uttarakhand

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sadhvi Renuka(Richa) Vs State of Uttarakhand

Adil Vs State of Uttarakhand

Masoom and Anr. Vs State of Uttarakhand

Reshu Vs State of Uttarakhand