Allahabad High Court
DILSHAD HASHMI @ RAHULversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail as the victim’s statement indicated no wrongdoing and there is insufficient material to justify continued detention, subject to stringent bail conditions.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Dilshad Hashmi (alias Rahul) in a criminal case (Crime No. 182 of 2026) involving alleged enticement of a minor under sections of the BNS Act, the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act. The applicant argued that the victim’s statement under Sections 180 and 183 of the Code indicated she left the house voluntarily, refused a medical examination, and that there was no material evidence against him; he also had no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail but could not refute the factual matrix. After weighing the victim’s statement, the lack of medical evidence, and the nature of the alleged offence, the court concluded that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to strict conditions. Consequently, the bail application was allowed, with the applicant released on personal bond and two sureties, and a set of conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or harassment of the victim.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged sexual offences under the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act despite the seriousness of the allegations.
- Whether the victim’s voluntary statement and refusal to undergo a medical examination constitute insufficient material to deny bail.
- Whether the provisions of Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the BNS Act, Sections 5L/6 of the POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(5) of the SC/ST Act justify the denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS Act — s. 137(2), 65(1), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 5L, 6
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(2)(5)
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- SC/ST Act
- victim statement
- medical examination refusal
- criminal procedure
- high court
- bail conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23977 of 2026
Dilshad Hashmi @ Rahul
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Danish, Rajiv Sisodia
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Devesh Kumar Singh, G.A., Rana
Pratap Singh
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Danish, counsel for the applicant, Sri Devesh Kumar Singh,
counsel for the first informant, Sri Roshan Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.
for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail during trial in Case Crime No. 182 of 2026, under Section
137(2), 87, 65 (1) BNS and Section 5L/6 POCSO Act and Section 3 (2) (5)
of SC/ST Act, Police Station Sujanganj, District Jaunpur.
3. Counsel for the applicant submitted that though in the FIR allegation has
been made that the applicant has enticed away the daughter of the first
informant but the victim in her statement under Section 180 and 183 BNSS
clearly stated that she herself left the house and no wrong has been
committed by the present applicant, therefore, the applicant has not
committed any offence. It is further submitted that victim has refused to
undergo her medical examination, therefore, as on date there is no material
against the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has no
criminal history. It is further submitted that charge sheet has been filed in the
present case, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation.
The applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since
30.05.2026. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail
and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently opposed the
BAIL No. 23977 of 2026
2
prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of
learned counsel for the parties; taking into account the statement of the
victim recorded under Section 180 and 183 BNSS, coupled with the fact that
the victim has refused to undergo her medical examination and keeping in
view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused 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. Accordingly, the bail application
is allowed.
6. Let the applicant- Dilshad Hashmi @ Rahul 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 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.
v. The applicant shall not approach or harass the victim either physically
or through social media till the conclusion of the trial.
7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
9. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
BAIL No. 23977 of 2026
3
computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website
of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the
undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.
10. 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.
11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or on e-prison portal and Trial
Court via e-mode 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 as well as Pila Pahan @ Peela Pahan and others Vs. State of
Jharkhand and another, in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 169 of 2025,
decided on 29.05.2026.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
September 23, 2026
CS/-
Digitally signed by :-
CHANDAN SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…