Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 194553 (ALL)

VIDYA SHANKAR MISHRA ALIAS PINTU MISHRA v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

BAIL/46009/2024 · 2025-10-15

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46009 of 2024 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of State is taken on record. 2. List revised. None appears on behalf of informant though the name of counsel is printed in the cause list on behalf of informant. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is named along with two other accused persons. As pper prosecution version on 05.08.2022 the applicant after committed her rape after serving her intoxicated tea and he also made video of this incident. Thereafter, by blackmailing her he committed her rape several times. It has also been alleged that the applicant had got viral the alleged video. As per version of the victim the first incident was occurred on 05.08.2022 and thereafter several times the applicant her rape, but there is no complaint made earlier and the present F.I.R. has been lodged on 12.10.2024. The delay in lodging of the F.I.R. has not been explained. The victim is major woman aged about 26 years. The victim and the applicant were talking to each other through mobile phone. In her medical examination no internal or external injury was found and the doctor has not given any definite opinion about her sexual assault, thus, in absence of any ingredient to proof her sexual assaulted committed by the applicant, it appears that victim was a consenting party. 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 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Shukla, Nilesh Kesharwani, Nitin Sharma, Vinod Kr Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Abhishek Tiwari, Amaresh Chandra Tiwari, G.A. Vidya Shankar Mishra Alias Pintu Mishra .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 29.10.2024, having no criminal history. 5. 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. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed. 7. Let the applicant-Vidya Shankar Mishra Alias Pintu Mishra, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 298 of 2024, under Sections 123, 316(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) of B.N.S. and Section 67 of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, Police Station- Rohaniya, District- Varanasi, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: 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 any 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. 8. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law. October 16, 2025 Mustaqeem. BAIL No. 46009 of 2024 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad