Ajay Ojha @ Sooraj Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 16 April, 2026

Author: Samit Gopal

Bench: Samit Gopal





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC:83955
 
 
 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10548 of 2025   
 
   Ajay Ojha @ Sooraj Kumar    
 
  .....Appellant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State of U.P. and Another    
 
  .....Respondent(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Appellant(s)   
 
:   
 
Avneesh Kumar Mishra, Surya Pratap Singh Parmar   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A., Mohd Achhay, Vashishtha Naraian Misra   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 75
 
   
 
 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Surya Pratap Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Mohd Achhay, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2/first informant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State/O.P. No.1 and perused the record.

3. This criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellant Ajay Ojha @ Sooraj Kumar, with the prayer to set-aside the impugned order dated 30.10.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Prayagraj in Bail Application No. 4366 of 2025 (CNR No. UPAD010108152025) (Ajay Ojha @ Sooraj Kumar Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 183 of 2025, under Sections 69, 115(2), 352, 351(3) BNS and Section 3(2)(v), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Cantt, District Prayagraj and with a further prayer to release the appellant on bail in the aforesaid case.

4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 15.09.2025 by the opposite party no.2 against the appellant and Rajnish Sharma alleging therein that she is a resident of Bihar and was living in Prayagraj and working since last five years as a Captain in Dance Restaurant Hotel, Civil Lines, Prayagraj and also studying simultaneously. Since last three years Ajay Ojha @ Sooraj Kumar an employee in the hotel working at the post of bouncer took her phone number from the register of the hotel and started talking to her and increased his closeness with her. He used to talk to her and then started telling her that he would marry her. On 15.10.2022 in the evening he came to her room and forcibly applied Sindoor on her and stated that now they are husband and wife. She started crying but he assured her that he would talk to his parents and they would get married soon. In the night, he established forcible physical relationship with her. From the year 2022 to 2025 he on a false promise to marry committed rape upon her. She went to the house of the accused and told everything to his mother, sister and brother on which they assured her of getting married with him and told her that they may earn money and then the marriage would be solemnized. He took a room on rent in Rajapur, Prayagraj where he took her also and kept her with him on an assurance of marrying her and committed rape upon her. In March, 2025 she became pregnant due to the said relationship after which the applicant forcibly gave her some medicines due to which she aborted her pregnancy. When she asked him to marry he abused her. On 27.04.2025 he assaulted her and threatened her for life and went away. His friends used to call her from their phone and threatened her and abused her. She has whatsapp chats and recording and also photographs regarding the relationship. FIR be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there has been enormous delay in lodging of the FIR inasmuch as the relationship between the appellant and the victim as per the FIR is stated to have been from the year 2022 to 2025 but in between no complaint whatsoever had been made by her during the said period. It is submitted that even otherwise the story of assault on her is of 27.04.2025 but the FIR has been lodged on 15.09.2025 which is after a period of five months. There is no explanation regarding the delay in lodging of the FIR. It is submitted that the relationship between the appellant and the victim/first informant was a consensual relationship and they were living together in a rented room but some confusion began between them and thus the present FIR has been lodged. It is further submitted that as per school records, the victim was aged about 20 years in the year 2022 and thus was a major. The appellant has no criminal history as stated in para 29 of the affidavit in support of the appeal and is in jail since 16.09.2025.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and State opposed the appeal and prayer for bail and submitted that the appellant is named in the FIR and also in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. It is submitted that he on a false promise to marry committed rape upon her since last three years and then all of sudden left her and went away. It is submitted that because of the act of the appellant, the life of the victim has been shattered. It is submitted that thus the prayer for bail in the appeal be dismissed.

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the victim was a major in the year 2022 when she came in contact with the appellant. They had a relationship for about three years. She even went and stayed with the appellant. Subsequently the relationship became sour and thus the present FIR has been lodged.

8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the appellant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the appellant- Ajay Ojha @ Sooraj Kumar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

i) The appellant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

ii) The appellant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

(iii) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(iv) The appellant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS/82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if appellant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS/174-A I.P.C.

(v) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 251 BNSS/313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS/229-A IPC.

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the appellant.

10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the appellant to prison.

11. Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed.

12. The impugned order dated 30.10.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Prayagraj of the aforesaid case is hereby set aside.

(Samit Gopal,J.)

April 16, 2026

M. ARIF