Allahabad High Court
SHANIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Shani, who is charged under Sections 64, 74, 352, 351(3) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act for allegedly outraging the modesty of a minor. The victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S. indicated a consensual relationship, and a medical examination showed no injuries; there was a discrepancy between the victim’s school certificate (age 16) and an ossification test (age 18‑20). The applicant had no prior criminal record and a charge‑sheet had already been filed, negating the need for custodial interrogation. The State opposed bail but did not dispute these facts. Weighing the nature of the offence, the evidence, and the applicant’s clean record, the court held that bail was appropriate and ordered his release on a personal bond with conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case of alleged outraging modesty under the POCSO Act and related sections of the B.N.S.
- Whether the victim's age discrepancy and lack of medical injuries affect the bail decision
- Whether the filing of a charge‑sheet eliminates the necessity for custodial interrogation
- Whether the applicant's clean criminal record warrants bail despite the seriousness of the alleged offence
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- sexual offence
- victim age
- medical report
- no prior criminal record
- bail conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25033 of 2026
Shani
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Narendra Deo Shukla, Vivek Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sandeep Pandey
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. No one appeared on behalf of the first informant despite the specific order
dated 12.08.2026 passed by the co-ordinate bench of this Court that the case
shall not be adjourned in the first round.
2. Heard Sri Vivek Shukla, consel for the applicant, Sri Roshan Kumar
Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail during trial in Case Crime No. 114 of 2026, under Section
64, 74, 352, 351(3) B.N.S. & Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station
Gyanpur, District Bhadohi.
4. Counsel for the applicant submitted that in the FIR as well as in the
statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, the
allegation of outraging the modesty of the victim has been made. However,
the victim in her statements recorded under Section 180 and 183 BNSS
admitted this fact that she was in relationship with the applicant and despite
establishing physical relationship the applicant did not marry her. It is
further submitted that from the School Certificate of the victim, the victim is
16 years old and as per the ossification test report, the victim is between 18-
20 years of age. It is further submitted that the medical examination report of
the victim does not show any mark of injury or any sexual assault 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
BAIL No. 25033 of 2026
2
abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 04.06.2026. In case, he is
granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the
trial proceedings.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but
could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
6. 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 medical
examination report of the victim 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.
7. Let the applicant- Shani 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.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
BAIL No. 25033 of 2026
3
10. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
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.
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 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…