Allahabad High Court
JATINversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the applicant.
Summary
The applicant Jatin, owner of a hotel in Meerut, was implicated in Crime No. 119 of 2026 under sections 137(2), 61(2), 65(1) of the BNS and sections 16, 17, 3 and 4(2) of the POCSO Act for allegedly failing to take the victim’s identification while taking that of a co‑accused. The prosecution alleged offences under those provisions. Jatin applied for bail during the pendency of the trial. The court examined the material and, without delving into the merits, found that the allegations were limited to procedural lapses and that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail. Accordingly, the court granted bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties and conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses. The bail order does not affect the continuation of the trial on merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under the cited provisions of the BNS and POCSO Acts pending trial
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- POCSO Act
- hotel owner
- identification documents
- trial pending
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15483 of 2026
Jatin
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nikil Pathak, Pooja Gond
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No. 5 out of 265)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the
informant has been served on 26.04.2026 but none is present on behalf of
the informant.
2. Heard Sri Nikil Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil
Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed
on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 119 of 2026, under Sections
137(2), 61(2), 65(1) of BNS and Sections 16/17, 3/4(2) of POCSO Act,
Police Station - Jani, District - Meerut, during the pendency of trial.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that
the applicant is the owner of the hotel in which the victim and the co-
accused stayed. The only allegations against the applicant are that he did
not take the ID of the victim and had taken the ID of the co-accused
alone.
5. 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.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
6. Let the applicant- Jatin, 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
BAIL No. 15483 of 2026
2
evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as
required.
7. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The
observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 7, 2026
Siddhant
Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHANT SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…