Allahabad High Court
SHANI RAJBHARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the applicant on a prima facie basis.
Summary
The applicant, Shani Rajbhar, filed a bail application in Criminal Case No. 91 of 2025, which involved offences under Sections 65(1), 69, 352, 351(3) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and Sections 5L and 6 of the POCSO Act. The court noted a delay of more than one month in lodging the FIR and that the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. indicated she was a consenting party. No video evidence was recovered. Considering these facts, the court found that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail and, without passing on the merits, ordered bail with standard conditions. The bail was granted on the condition of a personal bond, two sureties, and compliance with directions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses. Any breach of conditions would lead to cancellation of bail, and the trial on merits would continue unaffected.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving offences under the B.N.S.S., 2023 and the POCSO Act given the nature of the allegations.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the victim’s alleged consent affect the bail eligibility.
- Whether the absence of video evidence influences the decision to grant bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S., 2023 — s. 351(3), 352, 65(1), 69
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 5L, 6
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- consent
- delay in FIR
- POCSO Act
- evidence
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25411 of 2025
Shani Rajbhar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Kumar Bhardwaj, Kamla Singh,
Rajjan Kumar, Vijay Shanker Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.111 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Ms. Kamla Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Kishan
Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material
placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.91 of 2025, under Sections 65(1),
69, 352, 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and Section 5L/6 of POCSO Act, Police
Station Nonhara, District Ghazipur, during the pendency of trial.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions
made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the delay of more than one month in the institution of the FIR
and that the victim appears to be a consenting party as per her statement
recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., coupled with the fact that there is no
recovery of any video whatsoever, 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. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
5. Let the applicant- Shani Rajbhar, 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.
BAIL No. 25411 of 2025
2
6. 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
(Ravi Kant)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…