Allahabad High Court
DHANESHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the applicant.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered the bail application of Dhanesh, who was charged in Crime No. 41 of 2025 under sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the BNS Act and sections 3 and 4(2) of the POCSO Act. The victim’s statement recorded under section 183 of the BNS indicated consent, but the victim’s age was disputed; a school transfer certificate showed she was 13, yet the court found it unreliable under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act and noted that, per the Supreme Court’s decision in P. Yuvaprakash v. State Rep. by Inspector of Police, only a matriculation/equivalent or municipal certificate can be used for age determination in the absence of birth records. No medical evidence was presented to corroborate the alleged offence. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court held that a prima facie case for bail existed and ordered the applicant’s release on personal bond and sureties, subject to standard conditions. The bail order is conditioned on verification of sureties and compliance with the stipulated terms.
Issues considered
- Whether the victim was a minor at the relevant time, given the documentary evidence available.
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offences under the BNS and POCSO Acts.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 137(2), 65(1), 87
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act — s. 94
- POCSO Act — s. 3, 4(2)
Subjects
- bail
- minor
- age determination
- consent
- POCSO
- Juvenile Justice Act
- evidentiary standards
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23346 of 2025
Dhanesh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abdul Saleem Ahamad, Neha Sonker
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No. 100 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the
informant has been served on 30.05.2025 but none is present on behalf of
the informant.
2. Heard Smt. Neha Sonker, 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. 41 of 2025, under Sections
137(2), 87, 65(1) of BNS and Sections 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police
Station - Chakiya, District - Chandauli, during the pendency of trial.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that
the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS prima facie indicates
her consent. As per Class VII School Transfer Certificate, the age of the
victim has come out to be 13 years but the said certificate cannot be relied
upon in view of the provisions of Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection) Act. There is no other valid document on record to
establish that the victim was a minor at the relevant time. Moreover, in
light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in P. Yuvaprakash vs.
State Rep. by Inspector of Police (AIR 2023 SC 3525), only a
matriculation or equivalent certificate, or a certificate issued by a
municipal authority or Panchayat, can be relied upon for determination of
age in the absence of birth records. Furthermore, there is no medical
BAIL No. 23346 of 2025
2
evidence on record to corroborate the alleged incident.
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- Dhanesh, 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.
7. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The
observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
April 23, 2026
Siddhant
Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHANT SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…