HARSHVARDHAN ALIAS PEETER SRIVASTAVA v. STATE OF U.P.
BAIL/34473/2025 · 2025-10-27
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 172570 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 172570 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34473 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. According to the F.I.R., the informant and her mother-in-law, who used to dance in an event and that the applicant is an event manager. On 14.07.2025 at about 12:30 hours, the applicant came to her house and had committed rape upon her. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the incident is alleged to have taken place on 14.07.2025, whereas the F.I.R., has been lodged on 26.07.2025 without there being any plausible explanation of such an inordinate delay. Learned counsel has further contended that the victim is married major lady and is mother of a child and that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of B.N.S.S., has stated that on 14.07.2025 at about 12:30 hours in the night, the applicant came to her house and had forcibly established physical relation with her and had also threatened her and prior to three months, the applicant had also forcibly established physical relations. The applicant had also shown her photograph and video. Learned counsel further argued that the medical evidence does not corroborate with the prosecution version and since the applicant is an event manager of the victim and her mother-in-law and on the dispute of payment, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Harshvardhan Alias Peeter Srivastava .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 02.08.2025. 3.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. 4. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tamp320ering with the evidence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Let applicant Harshvardhan Alias Peeter Srivastava involved in Case Crime No. 283 of 2025 under Sections 64(2)(J)(M), 351(3) of B.N.S., Police Station Sipri Bazar, District Jhansi, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following condi tions:- i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 6. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be BAIL No. 34473 of 2025 2
at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law. 7. The bail application is allowed. October 28, 2025 S.Ali BAIL No. 34473 of 2025 3 (Dr.
Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad