Allahabad High Court

VIKASversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: KRISHAN PAHAL

Holding

The bail application is allowed.

Summary

Vikas was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 83 of 2026) alleging that he and co‑accused Shiva Singh lured two girls, the daughter and niece of an informant, on 10 March 2026. The prosecution alleges offences under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(2) of the IPC and Sections 5M/6 of the POCSO Act. The defence argued that the FIR was filed three days after the alleged incident, the victims gave statements indicating consent, they refused medical examination, and Vikas has no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail but could not refute the defence’s contentions. The court, noting the delay in filing the FIR, the victim’s consent statements, and the lack of corroborative medical evidence, held that prima facie the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, Vikas was released on bail subject to a personal bond, sureties and standard conditions.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite charges under the IPC and POCSO Act.
Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the victims' statements indicating consent affect the bail decision.
Whether the accused poses a risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing the jurisdiction.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 137(2), 65(2), 87
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 5M, 6

Subjects

bail
IPC
POCSO
consent
delay in FIR
sexual assault
minor

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15260 of 2026

Vikas
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : R.B. Pal, Umesh Kumar Pal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.24 out of 259)

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised. Learned State Law Officer has informed that the
notice to the informant has been served on 22.04.2026, but none is present
on behalf of the informant.

2. Heard Sri R.B. Pal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Kishan
Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material
placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.83 of 2026, under Sections 137(2),
87, 65(2) BNS, 2023 and Section 5M/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Koraon,
District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.

4. As per prosecution story, the two victims, daughter and niece of the
informant, are stated to have been enticed away by the applicant and co-
accused Shiva Singh on 10.03.2026 at about 9:00 p.m. The victim V1 is
stated to have been released somehow from the clutches of the applicant and
reached her house on 12.03.2026 at about 12:00 p.m.

5. 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 about three days, and there is no explanation for the said
delay. The FIR is even delayed by about one day from the date of recovery
of the victim V1. The victims seem to be consenting parties. The victim V1
had gone with the applicant, and the victim V2 had gone with co-accused
BAIL No. 15260 of 2026
2

Shiva Singh, and they did not raise any alarm whatsoever. There is no
medical corroboration of the incident, as they refused medical examination.
Even the statements of the victims recorded under Section 183 BNSS
indicate their consent. The victims, by their appearance, seem to be major,
although there is no valid document to suggest that they were minors. The
applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 18.03.2026. He
undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.

6. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application
but could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the delay in the institution of the FIR and the statement of the
victim V1 recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., which indicates her consent,
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.

8. Let the applicant- Vikas, 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.

9. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 6, 2026
(Ravi Kant)

Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…