Allahabad High Court
ARSHAD ALIAS IRSHADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The bail application is allowed.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Arshad alias Irshad, who was charged under IPC sections 137(2), 64, 351(2) and sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act for allegedly establishing a sexual relationship with a 21‑year‑old woman under a false promise of marriage and subsequently aborting a pregnancy. The prosecution alleged that the accused misled the victim, while the defence contended that the accused is innocent, the relationship was consensual, and there is no substantive evidence linking him to the alleged offences. The court examined the material on record, the arguments of counsel, and relevant Supreme Court precedents on bail in sexual offence cases. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court held that a prima facie case for bail existed. Consequently, the court ordered the release of the accused on personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions, and warned that breach would lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail during the pendency of trial for offences under IPC sections 137(2), 64, 351(2) and POCSO Act sections 5 and 6.
- Whether a prima facie case exists to justify the grant of bail despite the nature of the alleged offences.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 137(2), 351(2), 64
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 5, 6
Subjects
- bail
- IPC
- POCSO Act
- false promise of marriage
- sexual offence
- prima facie case
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22452 of 2025
Arshad Alias Irshad
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hirdesh Kumar Yadav, Sushma Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Najakat Ali
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.112 out of 277)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Hirdesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Najakat Ali, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Abhishek Mishra, learned
State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.463 of 2024, under Sections
137(2), 64, 351(2) BNS and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Vishunpura,
District Kushinagar, during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established
corporeal relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage and
had later on refused to comply with the said promise.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He
has nothing to do with the said offence. The victim is major aged about 21
years. The said fetus has been aborted. There is no clinching evidence to
suggest that the applicant misled the victim from the beginning. The
informant has converted a failed consensual physical relationship into a
criminal case. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since
19.12.2024. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the
liberty of bail.
6. Learned counsel for the informant and learned State Law Officer have
BAIL No. 22452 of 2025
2
vehemently opposed the bail application.
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 judgments of the Supreme Court passed in Pramod
Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2019 (9) SCC
608 and Ansaar Mohammad vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 2022
SCC OnLine SC 886 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- Arshad Alias Irshad, 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.)
April 20, 2026
Vikas Verma
Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…