HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30933 of 2026 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri P.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shiv Dutt Shukla, 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. 156 of 2026 under Sections 64, 76, 351(3), 352 BNS, registered at Police Station Gaurabadshahpur, District Jaunpur 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 major aged about 25 years. It is further submitted that on the date of registration of the FIR, a dispute arose between the applicant and the first informant and the applicant was challaned by the SDM under sections 170/126/135 BNSS. It is next submitted that on perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it appears that she was in consensual relationship with co-accused Nikhil Nishad as she has stated in her statement under section 180 BNSS that she wants to marry him. It is further submitted that medico-legal report of the victim does not support the allegation of rape on her and no video or photograph as alleged has been found during the investigation. It is further submitted that applicant has criminal history of one case and he has been languishing in jail since 04.8.2026. It is also submitted that the applicant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : P.K. Upadhyay, Vikram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sachin Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 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, however, he does not dispute the aforesaid facts. 5. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have sexually harassed and outraged the modesty of the victim, however, in her statement recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS, she has stated that co-accused Nikhil Nishad and the applicant committed rape on her. She has also stated in her statement under section 180 BNSS that she wants to marry co-accused Nikhil Nishad. The victim is major and her medico-legal report does not support the allegation of rape on her and no video or photograph as alleged has been found during the investigation. On the date of registration of the FIR, a dispute arose between the father of the applicant and the first informant and the applicant was challaned by the SDM under sections 170/126/135 BNSS. Applicant has criminal history of one case and he has been languishing in jail since 04.8.2026. 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 Sachin Yadav 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. BAIL No. 30933 of 2026 2 (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 17, 2026 Madhurima BAIL No. 30933 of 2026 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad