Allahabad High Court
TALEEM ANSARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail and granted bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Taleem Ansari, who was charged under IPC sections 376, 363, 366, 506, the POCSO Act (sections 3 and 4) and the Uttar Pradesh Anti‑Conversion Act (section 3/5(1)). The applicant claimed innocence, arguing that the alleged victim was a consenting adult of more than 17 years and that the FIR was filed with an unexplained delay. The informant opposed bail, but the court, after reviewing the material and hearing counsel, noted that the case appeared to involve a consensual relationship between two adolescents rather than a serious offence. Without passing on the merits, the court found a prima facie case for bail and ordered the applicant’s release on personal bond and sureties, subject to standard conditions. The bail order was made with a warning that any breach would lead to cancellation.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused facing serious offences including rape, kidnapping, POCSO and anti‑conversion charges.
- Whether the alleged victim is a minor under the POCSO Act.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR is a sufficient ground to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366, 376, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 3, 4
- Uttar Pradesh Anti‑Conversion Act — s. 3, 5(1)
Subjects
- bail
- IPC
- POCSO
- anti-conversion law
- consensual relationship
- minor
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13805 of 2026
Taleem Ansari
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Zaid Arshad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Nitin Raj Singh
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.46 out of 205)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Zaid Arshad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nitin Raj
Singh, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned
State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.135 of 2024, under Sections 376,
363, 366, 506 IPC, 3/4 POCSO Act and 3/5(1) U.P. Anti Conversion Law,
Police Station Kaondhiyara, District Allahabad, during the pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
FIR is delayed by more than one day, and there is no explanation for the said
delay. The victim is a consenting party, as she had gone with the applicant
all the way to Pune, but has stated that the applicant subsequently tried to
force her into conversion. The said allegations are false. The victim, by her
physical appearance, seems to be major, although, as per Class IX school
certificate, she was more than 17 years old. There is no valid document to
suggest that she was minor. The applicant himself is a youth aged about 21
years. A matter of a consensual relationship between two adolescents has
been converted into a criminal case by the informant. The applicant has no
criminal history and is in jail since 02.07.2024. He undertakes to cooperate
with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.
BAIL No. 13805 of 2026
2
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned State Law Officer have
vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the
submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration that the matter of a consensual relationship between two
adolescents has been converted into a criminal case by the informant, and
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the
Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail
application is allowed.
7 Let the applicant- Taleem Ansari, be released on bail on furnishing a
personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned,
subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not
tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the
trial court as required.
8. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 5, 2026
(Ravi Kant)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…