HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28359 of 2026 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Harish Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shiv Dutt Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 128 of 2026, under Sections 65(1), 70(2), 352, 115(2), 123 of BNS and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Harpur Budahat, District Gorakhpur, during the pendency of the trial. 3. At the very outset, learned AGA submits that as per his instructions the first informant has refused to accept the notice. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and on perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it appears that she is a consenting party and she has consumed some poison herself as the doctor who treated her has stated that he was informed that the victim herself consumed some poisonous substance. It is further submitted that the medico-legal report of the victim does not support the commission of rape on her as no external or internal injury has been found on the body of the victim and no sperm has been found in the vaginal smear of the victim. It is further submitted co-accused Satyam, Ram Charan and Nitin have already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is also submitted that the applicant has been languishing in jail since 22.5.2026 and he is having no criminal history. It Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Harish Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vishwanath Gaund .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) is lastly submitted that in case the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, however, it is submitted that the applicant established physical relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage and later on he refused to marry her. It is further submitted that the victim is a minor girl and her date of birth is 19.8.2010 as per certificate of Class 5th and 3.5.2010 as per Class 7th, however, he does not dispute the fact that there is no High School certificate or the certificate of school first attended and no radio-logical examination of the victim has been conducted for her age determination. 6. As per the allegation in the FIR, the applicant is said to have established physical relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage for about two years and later on he is said to have refused to marry her and the applicant administered some poison to her, however, the victim in her statement under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has stated that the applicant called her in an agricultural field where three other persons were present and all of them committed gang rape on her and they also administered some poisonous substance to her, however, the doctor in his statement has stated that he was informed that the victim herself consumed some poison. There are two conflicting documents regarding the age of the victim as her date of birth is 19.8.2010 as per certificate of Class 5th and 3.5.2010 as per Class 7th, however, there is no High School certificate or the certificate of school first attended and no radio-logical examination of the victim has been conducted for her age determination The medico-legal report of the victim does not support the commission of rape on her as no external or internal injury has been found on the body of the victim and no sperm has been found in the vaginal smear of the victim. Co-accused Satyam, Ram Charan and Nitin have already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court and t he applicant has been languishing in jail since 22.5.2026 and he is having no criminal history. 7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of BAIL No. 28359 of 2026 2 offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 as well as guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 8. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED. 9. Let the applicant- Vishwanath Gaund involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:- (i) 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. (ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. (iv) The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned. BAIL No. 28359 of 2026 3 12. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant. 13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685. September 9, 2026 Abhishek BAIL No. 28359 of 2026 4 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad