Allahabad High Court

AFSAR ALIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 13 September 2026
Bench: YOGESH DUBEY JOINT REGISTRAR JUDICIAL

Holding

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Afsar Ali, who was arrested in Crime No. 360 of 2026 under sections 137(2) and 65(1) of the B.N.S. and section 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act for alleged rape of a minor girl aged about 12 years. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, that the victim’s statement suggested consent, that the medico‑legal report did not support a rape allegation, and that there was no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the victim’s minority and the seriousness of the offence. The Court, taking into account the nature of the offence, the evidence, the applicant’s lack of criminal history, jail overcrowding, pendency of cases, and Supreme Court guidelines in Kapil Wadhawan vs CBI and Maya Tiwari vs State of U.P., held that bail could be granted without expressing a view on the merits. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to personal bond, sureties and conditions. The order also directed verification of identities and prompt release through the Bail Order Management System.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged under the POCSO Act and other sections for alleged rape of a minor, considering the nature of the offence and the evidence.
Whether the applicant’s claim of false implication and lack of incriminating material warrants bail despite the seriousness of the charges.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 137(2), 180, 183, 65(1)
POCSO Act — s. 3/4(2)

Subjects

bail
POCSO
minor
rape
criminal procedure
jail overcrowding
presumption of innocence
court discretion

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26971 of 2026

Afsar Ali
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prateek Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

1. Heard Shri Prateek Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and
Shri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. At
the very outset, learned AGA submits that the notice has been served on
the first informant.

2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 360 of 2026, under Sections 137(2),
65(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station
Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra, 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 the victim-
B in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has not
stated anything regarding physical relationship established between her
and the applicant. It is further submitted that on perusal of her statement,
it appears that she is a consenting party and she had left her home on her
free will and had gone to various places. It is further submitted that the
medico legal report does not support the allegation of commission rape
on her and the age of the victim has been found to be 12 years and 5
months as per certificate of Class VII, however, there is no certificate of
high school or certificate of school first attended and 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
BAIL No. 26971 of 2026
2

applicant has been languishing in jail since 16.05.2026, 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 A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail
and it has been submitted by him that the victim is a minor girl aged about
12 years and 5 months as per certificate of Class VII.

5. As per first information report, the applicant and co-accused are said to
have enticed away two minor girls, victim B and victim A, however, the
victim-B in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has
not stated anything regarding physical relationship established between
her and the applicant. It is further submitted that on perusal of her
statement, it appears that she is a consenting party and she had left her
home on her free will and had gone to various places. It is further
submitted that the medico legal report does not support the allegation of
commission rape on her and the age of the victim-B has been found to be
12 years and 5 months as per certificate of Class VII, however, there is no
certificate of high school or certificate of school first attended and 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 16.05.2026.

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- Afsar Ali involved in the aforementioned crime be
BAIL No. 26971 of 2026
3

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.

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, Sonbhadra 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 14, 2026
RKM

Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…