The Allahabad High Court granted conditional bail to the Bhojpuri YouTuber and comedian Mani Miraj, also known as Ramdi Miraj Alam, who was facing serious criminal charges in a case registered at Khoda Police Station in Ghaziabad. The accusations against him included rape and assault, with the allegations stating that he had engaged in sexual intercourse with the complainant after promising marriage and that this conduct constituted a crime under the relevant provisions of the law. The accused had been in custody since October 6, 2025, in connection with these allegations, and the proceedings had been ongoing before the trial court when he sought relief from the High Court. The petitioner moved the High Court for bail, and during the hearing he informed the bench that he had agreed to marry the informant under the Special Marriage Act, indicating that both parties had reached a mutual understanding regarding marriage. The counsel for the complainant stated before the court that since both parties had agreed to marry, she did not object to the bail application. Despite opposition from the State’s counsel, who emphasised the serious nature of the allegations, the bench, led by Justice Gautam Chowdhary, granted bail order dated February 17, 2026, directing that the applicant be released on bail without recording any comment on the guilt or innocence of the accused.
The High Court’s order reflected that the complainant, through her written statement in court, had indicated that the accused had now agreed to marry her, and that she had expressed no objection to his release on bail in light of this development. The court, while considering this material, granted bail to Mani Miraj subject to conditions and without making observations on the merits of the allegations, focusing on the immediate circumstances of the case as presented by the parties. The State counsel had opposed bail on the grounds that the allegations were serious and merited continued detention, but the court noted the consent expressed by the complainant to the marriage arrangement and the absence of objection to bail in the context of the compromise between the parties. The order directing bail did not delve into adjudication of the underlying charges, instead charting a path for the accused’s temporary release from custody in the interim period while the trial and investigation continued.
The development followed the complainant’s filing of an FIR alleging that the accused had made false promises of marriage and engaged in sexual intercourse, leading to his arrest and ongoing criminal proceedings. During the bail hearing, both sides presented their positions, with the defence highlighting the agreement to marry and the complainant’s lack of objection, and the State emphasising the gravity of the charges. After hearing submissions, the High Court concluded that bail could be granted under the circumstances, taking into account the written undertakings and representations made by the parties in court. The bail order allowed Mani Miraj’s release while ensuring that the legal process regarding the criminal charges would continue as per law. The case underscores the court’s approach to bail, prioritising the immediate context and compromise between the parties without prejudging the substantive allegations that remain to be examined in trial proceedings.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.