Allahabad High Court

PREMCHANDRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: KRISHAN PAHAL

Holding

The Court held that the applicant had established a sufficient case for bail and therefore granted bail with conditions.

Summary

The applicant Premchandra, arrested in connection with a case under Sections 137(2), 87, 70(2) of the IPC and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act, sought bail during the pendency of trial. He claimed absolute innocence, asserting that the victim‑witness had turned hostile and rescinded her earlier statement, thereby eliminating any likelihood of conviction. The State opposed the bail but could not refute the applicant's submissions. The Court, after considering the hostile witness, lack of criminal history, and the applicant's willingness to cooperate, found that the applicant had made out a case for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to a personal bond, sureties, and conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 137(2), 87, 70(2) of the IPC and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act when the key witness has turned hostile.
Whether the applicant's right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution is infringed by continued detention.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 137(2), 70(2), 87
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 5, 6

Subjects

bail
hostile witness
Article 21
POCSO Act
Indian Penal Code
criminal procedure
presumption of innocence

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15344 of 2026

Premchandra
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nitin Kumar, Raj Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 65
(Sl. No.50 out of 259)

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice has been
served to the informant on 23.4.2026.

2. Heard Sri Nitin Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri D.K. Singh,
learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Session Trial No. 1677 of 2025, Case Crime No.
362 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 70(2) BNS and 5/6 POCSO Act,
Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Etah, during the pendency of trial.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
victim has been examined as PW-1 during trial and she has completely
resiled from her earlier statement given to the Investigating Officer and the
allegations of the FIR. The witness has been cross-examined by the public
prosecutor after declaring her hostile. There is no likelihood of conviction in
the present case under the circumstances. The fundamental rights of the
applicant as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India stand
violated.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no
criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since
10.10.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is
released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
BAIL No. 15344 of 2026
2

6. Learned A.G.A. 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 fact that the victim has turned hostile, 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.

8. Let the applicant- Premchandra, 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
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.

9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.

10. 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 6, 2026
Shalini

Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…