Allahabad High Court
SHAHJAD AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The bail application was denied.
Summary
Shahjad Ahmad, arrested in connection with Crime No. 181 of 2024 under IPC sections 363 and 377 and POCSO Act sections 5M/6, applied for bail while in jail since 30 May 2024. The applicant claimed innocence, alleging the alleged conduct did not constitute an offence under Section 377 and that he has no prior criminal record. The State argued that the victim was a twelve‑year‑old girl, the conduct fell within Section 377, and the trial was at the stage of conclusion with the accused’s statement under Section 313 CrPC imminent. The Court examined the seriousness of the offence involving a minor, the stage of the trial, and the statutory provisions governing bail in such cases. Finding that the offence involved a child and that the trial was near completion, the Court rejected the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused charged under IPC 363, IPC 377 and POCSO Act sections 5M/6 when the alleged victim is a minor.
- Whether the stage of the trial (near conclusion) precludes the grant of bail.
- Whether the alleged conduct falls within the ambit of Section 377 IPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 313
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 377
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 5M, 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- minor victim
- Section 377
- Criminal Procedure
- trial stage
- innocence claim
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26148 of 2024
Shahjad Ahmad
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Laxmi Kant Shukla, Parvej Alam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Prasoon Tomar
Court No. - 19
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the record.
2. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case
Crime No. 181 of 2024, under Sections 363, 377 I.P.C. and Section 5M/6
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, P.S.
Afzalgarh, District-Bijnor and is in jail since 30.05.2024, is seeking
enlargement on bail during the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case
due to enmity as no such incident has ever taken place. He further stated
that the alleged victim has alleged some inappropriate behavior that does
not constitute an offense under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. He
lastly submitted that the applicant has no criminal history in his discredit
and he is in jail since 30.05.2024, hence he is entitled to be enlarged on
bail during pendency of the trial.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the victim was barely
twelve years old, and the act fell under Section 377 of the IPC. The
accused-applicant, who is an elderly man, committed the crime. He
further stated that the trial is at the stage of conclusion and the statement
of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. had either been recorded or is
likely to be recorded very shortly, and that at this stage, when the trial is
likely to conclude, the accused-applicant is not entitled to be released on
BAIL No. 26148 of 2024
2
bail.
5. Having considered the facts that the offence has been committed
against the victim, who is barely twelve years old and does not know the
meaning of the act. Moreover, the trial is at the stage of conclusion also
and in view of the above, the applicant's prayer for bail is liable to be
rejected.
6. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.
(Harvir Singh,J.)
February 23, 2026
Faridul
Digitally signed by :-
FAREEDUL HASAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…