CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 1586 of 2026 at Allahabad

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1586 of 2026 Tinku .....Applicant(s) Versus State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sunil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shiv Shankar Kaithal, Shivank Saxena Court No. - 65 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A for the State and peruse d the record. 2. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the victim had gone with the applicant out of her own free will and consent from Firozabad to Ahemedabad, whereas the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of B.N.S.S., has stated that on the threatening given her to kill her brother by the applicant, as such she went with the applicant and that the applicant had also committed wrong with her. It is thus contended that contradictory statements has been given by the victim, which itself demonstrates the falsity of allegations against the applicant. Several other submissions in order