HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31100 of 2026 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.P. Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 142 of 2026 under Sections 69, 127(2), 351(2), 352 BNS, registered at Police Station Sinduriyan, District Maharajganj during pendency of the trial. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and the victim is already married and her Nikahnama is annexed with the memo of application. It is further submitted that FIR is lodged after delay of 13 days and the victim has refused to undergo medico-legal examination. It is further submitted that as per the FIR, applicant is said to have established physical relationship with the victim on false promise of marriage and she was taken away by the applicant on 18.6.2026 and, thereafter, she was dropped on 24.6.2026 and the FIR has been lodged on 01.7.2026. It is next submitted that the victim has refused to undergo medico-legal examination. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history and he has been languishing in jail since 03.7.2026. It is also submitted that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that the victim has stated in her statements recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS that applicant established physical relationship with the victim on false promise of marriage. 5. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have established physical relationship with the victim on false promise of marriage. The victim is major and it is submitted by the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Kumar Gupta, Syed Irfan Ali Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Akash Kannaujiya .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) applicant that she is already married. ON perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it appears that she was in consensual relationship with the applicant for about five years. The victim has refused to undergo medico-legal examination. Applicant has no criminal history and he has been languishing in jail since 03.7.2026. 6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED. 7. Let the applicant Akash Kannaujiya involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with 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 not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. September 18, 2026 Madhurima BAIL No. 31100 of 2026 2 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad