Allahabad High Court
SHUBHAM YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Shubham Yadav, accused under sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) of the B.N.S. and sections 5J(ii) and 6 of the POCSO Act for allegedly enticing a 17‑year‑old girl who was pregnant. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, that the victim had consented, and that there was no scientific proof of her age, while the State contended that consent was immaterial under the POCSO provisions. The court examined the lack of incriminating material, the applicant’s clean record, the overcrowded jail situation, and recent Supreme Court guidelines on bail. Relying on the Supreme Court decisions in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI (2025) and Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P. (2024), the judge held that the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, the bail application was allowed subject to standard conditions and verification of identities.
Issues considered
- The appropriateness of granting bail in a POCSO case involving a minor who allegedly gave consent.
- Whether the absence of radiological age verification and the victim's pregnancy affect the bail decision.
- Whether the accused's lack of prior criminal record and jail overcrowding justify bail.
- Whether the victim's consent is legally relevant under the POCSO Act for bail considerations.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- minor consent
- criminal procedure
- jail overcrowding
- age determination
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26209 of 2026
Shubham Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prashant Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ankit Srivastava, G.A., Rahul
Srivastava
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Shri Rahul Dahiya, holding brief of Shri Prashant Kumar,
learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Nishant Veer Singh, holding brief
of Shri Ankit Srivastava, learned counsel for the first informant and Shri
O.P. 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 in Case Crime No. 542 of 2025, under Sections 137(2),
87, 64(1) of B.N.S. and Section 5J(ii)/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station
Sarnath, District Varanasi, during the pendency of the trial.
3. 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 on perusal
of the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183
BNSS, it appears that she is a consenting party and her age has been
found to be 17 years and 6 months as per certificate of Class VIII,
however, there is no certificate of high school or certificate of school first
attended. It is further submitted that no radio-logical examination has
been conducted for her age determination. It is further submitted that the
applicant is having no criminal history and the applicant has been
languishing in jail since 01.03.2026, 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 counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A.
BAIL No. 26209 of 2026
2
have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted by
them that the victim is pregnant and she is aged about 17 years and 6
months and her consent is immaterial.
5. As per first information report, the applicant is said to have enticed
away the daughter of the first informant aged about 17 years, however,
the victim has been recovered and on perusal of the statement of the
victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it appears that she is a
consenting party and her age has been found to be 17 years and 6 months
as per certificate of Class VIII, however, there is no certificate of high
school or certificate of school first attended. It is further submitted that no
radio-logical examination has been conducted for her age determination.
It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history and
the applicant has been languishing in jail since 01.03.2026.
6. 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.
7. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED.
8. Let the applicant- Shubham Yadav 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.
BAIL No. 26209 of 2026
3
(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.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. 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.
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
Jail Superintendent, Varanasi 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.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
September 8, 2026
RKM
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…