Allahabad High Court
NAZIR ALI @ KUDDUSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
In the absence of medical corroboration and given the FIR delay, the applicant established a case for bail, and the court granted bail despite the victim’s statement.
Summary
The applicant, Nazir Ali @ Kuddus, sought bail in a criminal case under Section 65(1) of the BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act, alleging false implication. He argued that the FIR was filed eight hours after the alleged incident, there was no medical evidence, and the victim’s age appeared to be above the statutory limit based on an ossification test. The State contended that the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNS named the applicant, making bail inappropriate. The Court examined the delay, lack of medical corroboration, and the applicant’s clean record, and concluded that the applicant had established a sufficient case for bail. Consequently, bail was granted subject to personal bond, sureties, and conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused under Section 65(1) BNS and Sections 3/4 POCSO Act pending trial despite the victim’s statement.
- Whether the eight‑hour delay in filing the FIR and absence of medical evidence justify bail.
- Whether the victim’s identification of the accused under Sections 180 and 183 BNS bars bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- POCSO
- delay in FIR
- medical evidence
- sureties
- victim statement
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15372 of 2026
Nazir Ali @ Kuddus
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Shukla, Durga Prasad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No.59 out of 269)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Durga Prasad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Krishna
Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Abhishek
Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on
record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 83 of 2026, under Section 65(1)
BNS and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Bindki, District Fatehpur, 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 FIR is delayed by eight hours and there is no explanation
of the said delay caused.
5. Although it is not the case of consent but the case of false implication, as
the informant was at animous with the family of the applicant. There is no
medical corroboration of the incident. The victim, by her physical
appearance, seems to be major although her age is 16 years as per
ossification test report.
6. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing
in jail since 21.3.2026 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the
BAIL No. 15372 of 2026
2
applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/INFORMANT:
7. The victim has categorically nominated the applicant in her statement
recorded u/s 180 and 183 BNSS, as such, the applicant is not entitled for
bail.
CONCLUSION:
8. 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 there is no medical corroboration of the incident
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.
9. Let the applicant- Nazir Ali @ Kuddus, 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.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
11. 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 14, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…