Aman Rathaur vs State Of U.P. And Another
- Neutral2026:AHC:104965
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A bail applicant has made out a case for release on bail where the following circumstances concur: inordinate delay of more than five months in the institution of the FIR, the nature of the charges (here, offences under Sections 64(1), 123, 351(2) BNS), the facts and circumstances of the case, and the submissions of the parties, taken together without expressing any opinion on the merits, warrant the grant of bail. A person released on bail must be bound by conditions including furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court, subject to verification of sureties, and undertakings not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and to appear before the trial court as required. Breach of any condition of bail entails cancellation of bail, and observations made in the bail order shall not affect the trial on the merits.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
2. Heard Sri Mukesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.102 of 2026, under Sections 64(1), 123, 351(2) BNS, Police Station Ajeetmal, District Auraiya, during the pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is the brother-in-law (Nandoi) of the victim and he is stated to have raped her. The FIR is delayed by more than five months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The matter of family feud has been converted into a criminal case by the informant. The victim obviously is major being a married women. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 25.3.2026. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.
5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the inordinate delay of more than five months in institution of FIR, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
7. Let the applicant- Aman Rathaur, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.
8. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 6, 2026
Vikas Verma
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free