Allahabad High Court
MANISH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
Manish Kumar was arrested in a case alleging rape of his 15‑year‑old daughter under several sections of the B.N.S. and Section 4(2) of the POCSO Act. The FIR was lodged six months after the alleged incident under Section 173(4) of the B.N.S., and the victim refused a medical examination. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, had no criminal record, and that a family dispute existed between him, the first informant and the victim, who are his daughters. The prosecution relied on a statement before a Division Bench that the applicant had assaulted and sexually exploited the victim. Considering the lack of incriminating material, the delay in filing the FIR, the applicant’s clean record, jail overcrowding, and Supreme Court precedents on bail, the court granted bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case of alleged rape of a minor under the POCSO Act and related statutes despite a delayed FIR and the victim’s refusal to undergo medical examination.
- Whether the applicant’s claim of false implication and lack of prior criminal history warrant bail.
- Whether considerations of jail overcrowding and Supreme Court bail guidelines affect the decision.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- minor
- POCSO
- delayed FIR
- jail overcrowding
- Supreme Court bail guidelines
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26208 of 2026
Manish Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vijay Babu
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anil Kumar, G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant and counter affidavit filed
on behalf of the first informant are taken on record.
2. Heard Shri Vinay Babu, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Anil Kumar, learned
counsel for the first informant and Shri Radhey Shyam, 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 in Case Crime No. 197 of 2026, under Sections 64(1), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2),
333 of B.N.S. and Section 4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station Vrindavan, District
Mathura, during the pendency of the trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present case though there is no incriminating material against him. It
is further submitted that the first information report has been lodged by way of filing
an application under Section 173(4) of BNSS after delay of six months. It is further
submitted that some dispute is going on between the applicant, first informant and the
victim as the first informant and the victim happens to be the daughters of the
applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has also filed a case against the first
informant and the victim. It is further submitted that the age of the victim has been
found to be 15 years as per birth certificate issued by the Municipal Corporation and
the victim has refused to undergo medico legal examination. It is further submitted
that the applicant is having no criminal history and the applicant has been languishing
in jail since 27.05.2026, 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 counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. have
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted by them that the first
informant filed Habeas Corpus petition before this Court, pursuant to which the
custody of the victim was handed over to the first informant and the victim, in her
BAIL No. 26208 of 2026
2
statement before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, has stated that the
applicant had assaulted and sexually exploited her.
6. As per first information report, which has been lodged by way of filing an
application under Section 173(4) of BNSS and the applicant is said to have committed
rape on his minor daughter aged about 15 years and the first information report has
been lodged after delay of six months. It is further submitted that some dispute is
going on between the applicant, first informant and the victim as the first informant
and the victim happen to be the daughters of the applicant. It is further submitted that
the applicant has also filed a case against the first informant and the victim. It is
further submitted that the age of the victim has been found to be 15 years as per birth
certificate issued by the Municipal Corporation and the victim has refused to undergo
medico legal examination. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no
criminal history and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 27.05.2026
7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned
counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity
of the accused and taking into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of
criminal cases before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the
judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of
Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 as well as guideline of this
Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC Online All
6765 regarding grant of bail 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.
8. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED.
9. Let the applicant- Manish Kumar 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.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
BAIL No. 26208 of 2026
3
cancellation of bail.
11. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the
court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Verification of mobile number and
Aadhaar card of the applicant as well as sureties should be verified by the court
concerned.
12. 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.
13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through Jail
Superintendent, Mathura via e-mail or e-prison portal 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.
September 8, 2026
RKM
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…