Allahabad High Court
ROHIT GARGversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court granted bail to the applicant, finding a prima facie case for release.
Summary
Rohit Garg was arrested in a case under Sections 137(2) and 64(2)(i) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act, alleging sexual offences against a 16‑year‑old girl. The applicant contended that the alleged victim had given consent, as reflected in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S., and that he was falsely implicated. The informant and the State opposed bail but could not refute the claim of consent. The court examined the material, the victim’s statement, and the applicant’s clean record, and held that a prima facie case for bail existed. Consequently, the court granted bail on personal bond and sureties, subject to standard conditions, without prejudicing the trial on merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences under the POCSO Act.
- Whether the victim's statement indicating consent under Section 183 B.N.S. creates a prima facie case for bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- minor
- consent
- Section 183
- prima facie
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22556 of 2025
Rohit Garg
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akash Dwivedi, Jitendra Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Satyendra Singh
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.115 out of 277)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Akash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satyendra
Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Arun Kumar Mishra,
learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.60 of 2025, under Sections 137(2),
64(2)(i) BNS and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kavinagar, District
Ghaziabad, 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
victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded
under Section 183 B.N.S.S. Her consent can also be drawn from the fact that
she has stated that she had taken certain money from the house alongwith
her.
5. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the victim, by
her looks, seems to be major, although she is stated to be 16 years old as per
the FIR. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 19.1.2025.
He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently
opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions made by
the counsel for the applicant.
BAIL No. 22556 of 2025
2
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 statement of the victim recorded under Section 183
B.N.S.S., which indicates her consent, 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- Rohit Garg, 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…