Allahabad High Court
BRIJESH @ BRAJESHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Brijesh @ Brajesh, who was charged under Section 64 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act for alleged rape of a minor. The applicant claimed false implication, citing a medico‑legal report and forensic lab report that did not support the charge, and highlighted his lack of criminal history and prolonged pre‑trial detention since April 9, 2026. The State and the informant opposed bail, relying on the victim’s statement under Sections 180 and 183 of the Evidence Act that the applicant committed the rape. Referring to Supreme Court precedents on bail, the court noted the nature of the offence, the evidence, and the problem of jail overcrowding, and, without expressing an opinion on the merits, granted bail with standard conditions. The order directed verification of identities, issuance of the bail order through the Bail Order Management System, and communication to the jail within 24 hours.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a POCSO‑related rape case pending trial.
- Whether the medico‑legal and forensic reports undermine the charge of rape.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal record and jail overcrowding justify bail.
- How the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Kapil Wadhawan and Maya Tiwari cases apply to bail decisions.
Legislation cited
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 180, 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 64
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- rape of minor
- medico‑legal report
- jail overcrowding
- Supreme Court precedent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22309 of 2026
Brijesh @ Brajesh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dhanraj Singh Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Bipin Kumar, G.A., Kamal Singh
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Dhanraj Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and
Sri Shiv Dutt Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Kamal Singh,
learned counsel for the first informant.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 85 of 2026, under Sections 64 BNS
and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Ghazipur, District
Fatehpur during the pendency of the trial.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and the medico-
legal report of the victim as well as FSL does not support the commission
of rape on her. It is further submitted that the age of the victim has been
found to be 16 years as per ossification test and 15 years as per school
record, however, there is no mention of any class in which she was
studying and the victim before the doctor has stated that the applicant
gave a bad touch. It is also submitted that the applicant has been
languishing in jail since 9.4.2026 and he is having no criminal history. It
is lastly submitted that in case the applicant is granted bail, he will not
misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A.
have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the
aforesaid facts, however, it is submitted that the victim is a minor girl
aged about 16 years as per ossification test and 15 years as per school
BAIL No. 22309 of 2026
2
record and the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and
183 BNSS has stated that the applicant committed rape on her.
5. As per the allegation in the FIR, the applicant is said to have
committed rape on the victim aged about 15 years, however, the medico-
legal report of the victim as well as FSL does not support the commission
of rape on her. The age of the victim has been found to be 16 years as per
ossification test and 15 years as per school record, however, there is no
mention of any class in which she was studying and the victim before the
doctor has stated that the applicant gave a bad touch. The applicant has
been languishing in jail since 9.4.2026 and he is having no criminal
history.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions
of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of
offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account
overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial
courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex
Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation
reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 as well as guideline of this Court
in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC
Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is
entitled to be enlarged on bail.
7. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED.
8. Let the applicant- Brijesh @ Brajesh involved in the aforementioned
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,
with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as
to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police
officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely
BAIL No. 22309 of 2026
3
without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or
commission of any crime after being released on bail.
(iv) The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the
bond executed by him.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as well
as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
11. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to
the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to
ensure early release of the applicant.
12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal within 24
hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4
of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
September 30, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…