MONU CHAUHAN vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — BA1/2354/2025
Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 323,504,506,376(2)(n). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 30th May 2026.
CNR: UKHC010193342025
Filing Number
BA1/9987/2025
Filing Date
03-12-2025
Registration No
BA1/2354/2025
Registration Date
03-12-2025
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
APPLICATIONS ( 5 )
Sub-Category
BAIL DURING THE TRIAL ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
30th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MONU CHAUHAN
Adv. GAURAV SINGH
Respondent(s)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254
BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254
BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-12-2025 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
| 30-05-2026 | BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254 |
| 20-02-2026 | BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254 |
| 10-01-2026 | BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254 |
| 24-12-2025 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
Orders
Case Summary: BA1/2354/2025 The court granted bail to Monu Chauhan, accused of seduction under false promise of marriage (IPC §376(2)(n)) and related offenses. Hon'ble Justice Alok Mahra found that both parties were major adults, the alleged relationship was consensual and prolonged, the applicant has no criminal history, poses no flight risk or evidence tampering danger, and lengthy custody is unjustified given the trial's distant conclusion date. Bail was granted on personal bond with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: BA1/2354/2025 The court granted bail to Monu Chauhan, accused of seduction under false promise of marriage (IPC §376(2)(n)) and related offenses. Hon'ble Justice Alok Mahra found that both parties were major adults, the alleged relationship was consensual and prolonged, the applicant has no criminal history, poses no flight risk or evidence tampering danger, and lengthy custody is unjustified given the trial's distant conclusion date. Bail was granted on personal bond with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts