Allahabad High Court
SHIVAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
Shivam was arrested in connection with a case under several sections of the B.N.S. and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act, the alleged victim being a 16‑year‑old girl. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, that the relationship was consensual and that there was no medical evidence of rape. The State argued that the victim was a minor and that the allegations warranted detention. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI, Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P.) and the policy on bail, the court examined the nature of the offence, the lack of incriminating material, and the applicant’s clean record. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court held that the applicant was entitled to bail and ordered his release on personal bond with conditions. The bail order was directed to be communicated to the jail through the Bail Order Management System.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a POCSO‑related case involving a minor alleged to have consented.
- Whether the absence of medical evidence and the claim of false implication justify bail.
- Whether the Supreme Court guidelines on bail and the circumstances of overcrowded jails warrant release.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 137(2), 351(2), 352, 64(1), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 5, 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- minor
- consent
- false implication
- criminal procedure
- Supreme Court guidelines
- overcrowded jails
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27030 of 2026
Shivam
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanskar Gaur
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Jitendra Singh
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Shri Sanskar Gaur, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Jitendra
Singh, 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. 150 of 2026, under Sections 137(2), 87,
352, 351(2), 64(1) of B.N.S. and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station
Mundapandey, District Moradabad, 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 she had entered into matrimonial alliance with the
applicant with her free consent. It is further submitted that earlier the victim
was married to the first informant Anuj Kumar and the first informant has
also been made as accused and he has already been granted bail by this
Court vide order dated 21.08.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No.27538 of 2026. It is further submitted that the age of the
victim has been found to be 16 years and 21 days as per school leaving
certificate of Class VIII, however, there is no certificate of high school or
certificate of school first attended. It is further submitted that the medico
legal report does not support the allegation of commission rape on her 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. 27030 of 2026
2
applicant has been languishing in jail since 02.06.2026, 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.
have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted by
them that the victim is a minor girl aged about 16 years and 21 days as per
school leaving certificate of Class VIII.
5. As per first information report, the wife of the first informant the victim is
said to have been enticed away by the applicant and some unknown person
and the age of the victim has been found to be 16 years and 21 days 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 on perusal of
the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it
appears that she was in consensual relationship with the applicant and she
had entered into matrimonial alliance with the applicant and earlier she was
married to the first informant. It is further submitted that the medico legal
report does not support the allegation of commission rape on her and no
radio-logical examination has been conducted for her age determination. Co-
accused Anuj Kumar has already been granted bail by this Court vide order
dated 21.08.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.27538 of
2026. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history
and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 02.06.2026.
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- Shivam involved in the aforementioned crime be
released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in
BAIL No. 27030 of 2026
3
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, Moradabad 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 14, 2026
RKM
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…