Allahabad High Court
GAURAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The Court held that the applicant made out a prima facie case for bail and therefore granted bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Gaurav, who was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 561 of 2025) involving alleged offences under the Indian Penal Code and the POCSO Act. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, citing a 19‑day delay in filing the FIR, lack of medical evidence, absence of photographs, and no indication that the alleged victim was a minor. The State opposed bail but could not refute the applicant's submissions. The Court, noting the delay, the paucity of corroborative evidence, and the applicant's clean record, held that prima facie the applicant was entitled to bail. Consequently, bail was granted subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and standard conditions regarding non‑tampering with evidence and witness intimidation.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the charges under the IPC and POCSO Act.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and lack of medical/photographic evidence justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 127(2), 137(2), 351(2), 352, 64(2), 65(1), 75
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 3/4(2), 5-L/6
Subjects
- bail
- delay in FIR
- lack of medical evidence
- POCSO
- Indian Penal Code
- family dispute
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15384 of 2026
Gaurav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Tripathi, Surya Prakash Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.60 out of 269)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the
informant has been served on 01.05.2026, but none is present on behalf of
the informant.
2. Heard Sri Ajay Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil
Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on
record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.561 of 2025, under Sections
137(2), 127(2), 352, 351(2), 65(1), 75, 64(2)M BNS and 3/4(2), 5-L/6
POCSO Act, Police Station Garhmukteshwar, District Hapur, 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
F.I.R. is delayed by about 19 days from the last incident and by about 2
months from the incident as mentioned in the F.I.R. A matter of discord
between two families has been converted into a criminal case by the
informant, as the applicant was earlier also prosecuted for breach of peace
by the police concerned on 28.08.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that there is no
medical corroboration of the incident. There is nothing on record to suggest
that the victim was minor. There is no recovery of any photographs
BAIL No. 15384 of 2026
2
whatsoever. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since
04.10.2025. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the
liberty of bail.
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 delay in the institution of the FIR, the absence of any
medical corroboration of the incident and that there is no recovery of any
photographs, 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- Gaurav, 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 14, 2026
(Ravi Kant)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…