Allahabad High Court
AMANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The Court granted bail to the applicant, finding that he had made out a case for bail.
Summary
The applicant, Aman, was arrested in a gang‑rape case (Crime No. 360 of 2025) and charged under Sections 87, 70(2), 127(2) of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 5G/6 of the POCSO Act. He contended that he was falsely implicated, arguing that the victim’s initial statement under Section 180 did not mention him, and that the later statement under Section 183 was an afterthought lacking medical corroboration. The State argued that the victim’s later statement named Aman, making him ineligible for bail. The Court noted that Aman’s name was absent from the charge‑sheet and the earlier statement, that the main accused had already been granted bail, and that there was no criminal history or evidence of flight risk. Without passing on the merits, the Court held that Aman had made out a case for bail and ordered his release on personal bond and sureties, subject to standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite being named in the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the Evidence Act.
- Whether the absence of the applicant’s name in the charge‑sheet and lack of medical evidence justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 180, 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 127(2), 70(2), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 5G, 6
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- POCSO
- gang rape
- victim statement
- evidentiary insufficiency
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14249 of 2026
Aman
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Saurabh Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No. 35 out of 265)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to
the informant has been served on 23.4.2026.
2. Heard Sri Saurabh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri
J.K. Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on
record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 360 of 2025, under Sections 87,
70(2), 127(2) BNS, 5G/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Sahaswan, District
Budaun, during the pendency of trial.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT:
4. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the
present case. The allegations against the applicant are of having helped the
co-accused person in enticing away the victim. As per FIR, the victim is
stated to have taken away Rs.1 lakh and ornaments from her house.
5. The victim is a consenting party as far as the co-accused person Shahwaz
@ Shavez is concerned. The statement of the victim was recorded by the
investigating officer under Section 180 B.N.S.S. and she has stated that she
had gone with the co-accused person Shahwaz @ Shavez out of her own
sweet will but she has categorically denied having taken any ornaments or
money from her house and the name of the applicant was found missing in
the said statement.
BAIL No. 14249 of 2026
2
6. Subsequently, in the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS, she
has nominated the applicant and co-accused persons to have gang raped her.
The said allegations have been made as an afterthought. There is no medical
corroboration of the incident.
7. The main accused person Shahwaz @ Shavez has already been granted
bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.1.2026 passed
in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.803 of 2026. The case of the
applicant is at better footing to the said co-accused person, who happens to
be the main accused person. The police had exonerated the applicant but the
trial court took cognizance against the applicant as well, as such, he was
summoned by it.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no
criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since
30.4.2026 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is
released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/INFORMANT:
9. It is an offence of gang rape and the applicant has been nominated in the
said offence in the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS, as such,
the applicant is not entitled for bail.
CONCLUSION:
10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made
by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the fact that applicant was not nominated in the charge sheet
and even his name was missing in the statement of the victim recorded u/s
180 BNSS and his name has been added during her statement recorded u/s
183 BNSS only and the main accused person has already been enlarged on
bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court
is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail
application is allowed.
11. Let the applicant- Aman, who is involved in aforementioned case crime
be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each
in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to
BAIL No. 14249 of 2026
3
verification of sureties, with the condition that he shall not tamper with
evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as
required.
12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant
shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent
opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 7, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…