VISHAL v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO.
BAIL/5922/2025 · 2025-10-30
Pankaj Bhatia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 184639 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 184639 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5922 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and Sri Pramod Kumar, learned Counsel for the informant. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.296 of 2024, under Sections 64, 351(3), 351(2) of BNS and Section 67 of IT Act, Police Station Akhand Nagar, District Sultanpur. 3. The FIR in question was lodged through an application under Section 175(3) of BNS on 27.08.2024. It was alleged that on 22.07.2024 at about 8:00 AM, the informant aged about 22 years was called by the applicant aged about 19 years for making physical relation on the pretext of making the earlier video and photos of physical relationship viral. It was alleged that on 18.04.2024, the applicant had formed physical relation against her consent and subsequently, the marriage of the victim was performed. It was also alleged that after marriage, the applicant made physical relation against her consent on 26.06.2024. 4. In the light of the allegations, the Counsel for the applicant argues that no video as alleged in the FIR was made a part of the case diary. He further argues that the application was filed on 27.08.2024 whereas the allegation of making the video viral is 22.07.2024. 5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pawan Kumar Tiwari, Ashish Kumar Dubey, Sukh Deo Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Pramod Kumar Vishal .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
6. Considering the submission of the Counsel for the applicant and there being no plausible explanation for substantial delay; there being no recovery of video and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 30.09.2024, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7.
Let the applicant Vishal be released on bail in the abovesaid first information report number on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. October 30, 2025 akverma BAIL No. 5922 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench