Bhola Alias Vijay Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22480 of 2025

Court No. - 65 (Sl. No. 94 out of 259) HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶1List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 26.6.2025.

¶2Heard Sri Ravi Shankar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajai Singh, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Ajai Kumar, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Special Session Case No. 961 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 54 of 2025, under Section 65(1) BNS and 5n/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Jarifnagar, District Budaun, during the pendency of trial.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by four days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The allegations against the applicant in the FIR were of outraging of modesty only but the same have been escalated to that of rape by the victim in her statements recorded u/s 180 and 183 BNSS. The said statements have been recorded after tutoring. There is no medical corroboration of the incident.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since

30.3.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kapil Tiwari, Ravi Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ajai Kumar, G.A. Bhola Alias Vijay Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶6Learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that already the statement of PW-1 has been recorded and there are serious allegations against the applicant of having ravished the minor girl.

¶7Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that the FIR did not whisper a single word about the allegations of rape; there being no medical corroboration of the incident coupled by the fact that FIR itself is delayed by four days and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶8Let the applicant-Bhola Alias Vijay Kumar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to verification of sureties, with the condition that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.

¶9In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶10It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. April 23, 2026 Shalini BAIL No. 22480 of 2025 (Krishan Pahal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad