Allahabad High Court
AVINASHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Avinash, who was charged under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the BNS Act and Sections 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act for alleged sexual offences. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, that the alleged victim was a consenting party, and that medical reports indicated the victim was 18 years old, contradicting a school certificate showing her as 17. The State argued that the victim was a minor (born 14‑May‑2009) and that the allegations were serious. After reviewing the FIR, victim statements under sections 180 and 183 of the BNS Act, and the medical evidence, the court, without expressing a view on the merits, found the case suitable for bail. The court ordered the release of the applicant on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged under the POCSO Act and BNS Act despite allegations of sexual offences involving a minor.
- Whether the disputed age and alleged consent of the victim affect the grant of bail.
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNS) — s. 137(2), 180, 183, 65(1), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 3/4(2)
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- consent
- age of victim
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26276 of 2026
Avinash
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajendra Singh Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Rajendra Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Uma Shakar
Mishra, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on
bail in Case Crime No. 311 of 2026 under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) BNS and 3/4(2)
POCSO Act registered at Police Station Sirsaganj, District Firozabad during pendency
of the trial.
3. At the very outset, learned A.G.A. states that notice has been served upon the first
informant.
4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case and on perusal of the statements of the victim
recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it appears that she is a consenting party. It
is further submitted that age of the victim has been found to be 18 years as per
radiological report and her medico-legal report does not support the allegation of rape
on her. It is further submitted that applicant, who has no criminal history, has been
languishing in jail since 17.6.2026 and he undertakes that he will not misuse the
liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of
cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
applicant and submits that date of birth of the victim is 14.5.2009 as per certificate of
class Vth.
6. As per the FIR, applicant and co-accused Golu are said to have enticed away the
daughter of the first informant as well as daughter of his neighbor, however, both the
victims have been recovered. The first victim has stated in her statements recorded
under sections 180 and 183 BNSS that she was in love with the applicant and had left
her home on her own free will and the applicant established physical relationship with
BAIL No. 26276 of 2026
2
her on her consent, however, in her statement under section 183 BNSS, she has stated
that applicant established physical relationship with her without her consent. The
victim has been found to be aged about 17 years as per certificate of class Vth and 18
years as per radiological report and her medico-legal report does not support the
allegation of rape on her. Applicant, who has no criminal history, has been
languishing in jail since 17.6.2026.
7. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record
and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for
bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED.
8. Let the applicant Avinash involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail
on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with 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 not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates
fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement
under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any
adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial
court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either
personally or through his counsel.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression
on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in
this order.
September 8, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…