Allahabad High Court

PREM KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 17 March 2026
Bench: GAUTAM CHOWDHARY

Holding

The applicant has made out a case for bail and the bail application is allowed.

Summary

Prem Kumar was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No.106 of 2025) involving offences under Sections 87, 137(2), 65(1) of the B.N.S. and Section 5L/6 of the POSCO Act. The victim’s ossification test indicated an age of about 21 years, and the applicant’s counsel argued that the victim was a consenting party, making the allegations false. The applicant had been in custody since 8 September 2025 and sought bail, offering to cooperate with the trial process. The State opposed bail, contending that innocence could not be determined at the pre‑trial stage and that the applicant might reoffend. After considering the facts, submissions, and the nature of the evidence, the Court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail and granted the bail application subject to strict conditions.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail at the pre‑trial stage despite the seriousness of the offences alleged
Whether the victim’s age and alleged consent affect the bail consideration

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 65(1)
POSCO Act — s. 5L/6

Subjects

bail
pre‑trial detention
consent
victim age
Criminal Procedure
Sections 87, 137(2), 65(1)
POSCO Act

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1330 of 2026

Prem Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rakesh Singh Yadava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 65
HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

1. Pursuant to the earlier order of this Court, a sealed envelop
has been received, which has been opened today in the Court.
The envelop contains the report of the concerned Court along
with ossification test report. The ossification test of the victim
shows that the victim is aged about 21 years and the same is
taken on record.

2. Office vide its report dated 17.02.2026 has reported that
notice issued to the first informant of the case has been served
inspite of service of notice, none appears either for the
informant or for the High Court Legal Services.

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for
the State and peruse d the record.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that
according to the ossification test, the victim's age is in between
21 years. Learned counsel further argued that perusal of the
statements of the victim would go to show that the victim is a
consenting party. Learned counsel thus argued that the victim
is a consenting party and that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Several
other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the
allegations made against the applicant have also been placed
before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the
BAIL No. 1330 of 2026
2

counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also
been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the
applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law
and shall faithfully make himself available before the court
whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions
which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next
submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 08.09.2025.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of
the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant
cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not
deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on
bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse
the liberty of bail.

6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of
evidence, and all attending facts and circumstances of the case,
without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this
Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for
bail. Hence the bail application is allowed.

7. Let applicant Prem Kumar involved in Case Crime No.106
of 2025 under Sections 87, 137 (2), 65(1) B.N.S., Section 5L/6
of POSCO Act, Police Station Dubhad, District Ballia, be
released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy
local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the
court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution
witnesses.

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial
court.

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the
offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the
commission.
BAIL No. 1330 of 2026
3

v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from
disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper
with the evidence.

8. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial
Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in
accordance with law.

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)
March 18, 2026
S.Ali

Digitally signed by :-
SHAUKAT ALI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…