Allahabad High Court
AZAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that prima facie the applicant had made out a case for bail and therefore granted bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Azam, who was charged under Sections 333, 65(1), 351(3) of the IPC, Section 183 of the CrPC and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act for alleged rape of a 17‑year‑old girl. The applicant pleaded innocence, highlighted a four‑day delay in filing the FIR and questioned the victim’s age based on an ossification test. The State opposed bail but could not refute the applicant’s submissions. The court, after noting the delay, the victim’s statement, the applicant’s clean record and his undertaking to cooperate, held that prima facie the applicant was entitled to bail. Consequently, bail was granted subject to a personal bond, two sureties and standard conditions of non‑tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a POCSO‑related rape case despite the seriousness of the offence.
- Whether the four‑day delay in lodging the FIR and the absence of the informant affect the bail eligibility.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal record and willingness to cooperate justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 183
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 65(1)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 333, 351(3)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 5, 6
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- POCSO
- delay in FIR
- minor
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
- evidence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15417 of 2026
Azam
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sandeep Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.64 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 04.05.2026, but none is present on behalf of
the informant.
2. Heard Sri Sandeep 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.66 of 2026, under Sections 333,
65(1), 351(3) BNS, 2023 and 5L/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Gangoh,
District Saharanpur, 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
FIR is delayed by about 4 days, and there is no explanation for the said
delay. The victim is a consenting party, though it is alleged that the applicant
barged into her house and raped her. By her physical appearance, she seems
to be major, although she is 17 years old as per ossification test report. In
view of the inherent margin of error in such tests, it is urged that a leverage
of two years on the upper side may be granted to the applicant while
determining the age of the victim. The applicant has no criminal history and
is in jail since 31.01.2026. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not
misuse the liberty of bail.
BAIL No. 15417 of 2026
2
5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but could
not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.
6. 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 recorded under Section 183 BNSS, 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.
7. Let the applicant- Azam, 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.
8. 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…