Allahabad High Court

DEOVRAT PANDEY ALIAS SHIVAM PANDEYversusSTATE 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 Deovrat Pandey, accused under sections of the Criminal Procedure Code and the POCSO Act for allegedly enticing a minor girl. The applicant claimed false implication, citing the victim's statement that she left home voluntarily and was in love with him, and highlighted the victim's refusal to undergo a medico‑legal exam and the discrepancy in her age records. The State argued that the victim was a minor and that consent is immaterial under the POCSO Act. Relying on Supreme Court precedents on bail, the court noted the applicant's clean record, the overcrowded jails, and the pendency of trial courts, and without expressing a view on the merits, granted bail with conditions. The order directed verification of identities, bond execution, and prompt release through the Bail Order Management System.

Issues considered

Whether bail can be granted in a POCSO case where the alleged victim, a minor, claims consent.
Whether the lack of a medico‑legal examination and age documentation affect the bail decision.
Whether the applicant's clean criminal record and jail overcrowding justify bail despite the nature of the offence.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 137(2), 65(1), 87
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 5(i), 6

Subjects

bail
POCSO
minor
consent
jail overcrowding
trial pendency
false implication

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27041 of 2026

Deovrat Pandey Alias Shivam Pandey
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhaya Raj Singh, Arvind Kumar
Singh, Krishna Kumar Chaudhari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Dhirendra Kumar Verma, G.A., Renu
Swarnkar

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

1. List revised. Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the
applicant and Sri J.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the
record.

2. Name of Sri Dhirendra Kumar Verma and Miss. Renu
Swarnkar learned counsel appear as counsel for the first informant but
neither of them are present.

3. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 46 of 2026, under Sections 137(2),
87, 65(1) BNS and Section 5(i)/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Ahirauli
Bazar, District Kushinagar, during the pendency of the trial.

4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and the victim in
her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has stated that
she had left her home on her free will and she was in love with the
applicant and she has also stated that nothing wrong was done to her. It is
further submitted that the age of the victim has been found to be 16 years
as per her radio-logical examination and 13 years as per her school record
of Class 7th however, there is no High School certificate or the certificate
of school first attended. It is further submitted that the victim has refused
to undergo medico-legal examination. It is also submitted that the
BAIL No. 27041 of 2026
2

applicant has been languishing in jail since 14.4.2026 and he is having no
criminal history. It is lastly submitted that in case the applicant is granted
bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial
proceedings.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail
but could not dispute the aforesaid facts, however, it is submitted that the
victim is a minor girl aged about 16 years as per her radio-logical
examination and 13 years as per her school record of Class 7th and her
consent is immaterial.

6. As per the allegation in the FIR, the applicant is said to have enticed
away the daughter of the first informant, however, the victim has been
recovered and victim in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and
183 BNSS has stated that she had left her home on her free will and she
was in love with the applicant and she has also stated that nothing wrong
was done to her. The age of the victim has been found to be 16 years as
per her radio-logical examination and 13 years as per her school record of
Class 7th however, there is no High School certificate or the certificate of
school first attended. The victim has refused to undergo medico-legal
examination. It is also submitted that the applicant has been languishing
in jail since 14.4.2026 and he is having no criminal history.

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- Deovrat Pandey Alias Shivam Pandey involved in
BAIL No. 27041 of 2026
3

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 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
concerned Jail Superintendent 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
Abhishek

Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…