Allahabad High Court
ARUNversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The Court granted bail, finding a prima facie case for release.
Summary
Arun was charged under sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the BNS Act and sections 3 and 4(2) of the POCSO Act for an alleged offence in Meerut. The victim, aged about 18 as per an ossification test, gave a statement under section 183 BNSS indicating consent, having stayed with the accused for 20 days without raising alarm. No medical evidence corroborated the alleged assault. The Court, relying on Supreme Court precedents regarding the margin of error in radiological age determination, found that the prosecution’s case was weak on a prima facie basis. Consequently, the bail application was allowed, subject to personal bond, sureties, and standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under the BNS and POCSO statutes given the victim's alleged consent and age.
- Whether the lack of medical evidence and the margin of error in radiological age assessment affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- consent
- age of victim
- POCSO
- medical evidence
- ossification test
- prima facie
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27175 of 2025
Arun
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akash Tomar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No. 137 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the
informant has been served on 4.8.2025 but none is present on behalf of
the informant.
2. Heard Sri Atul Verma, Advocate holding brief of Sri Akash Tomar,
learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for
the State and also perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0086 of 2025, under Sections
137(2), 87, 65(1) of BNS and Sections 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police
Station - Kankerkheda, District - Meerut, during the pendency of trial.
4. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, ossification test report of the
victim has been received. Let the original ossification test report be
transmitted to the Trial Court concerned after retaining the photocopy of
the same.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that
the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS prima facie indicates
her consent as she had accompanied the applicant from Meerut to Shamli
and stayed there with him for 20 days without raising any alarm
whatsoever. As per the ossification test report, the victim is stated to be
about 18 years of age. In view of the judgments of the Supreme Court in
Jaya Mala Vs. State of J & K, (1982) 2 SCC 538 and Mohd. Imran
BAIL No. 27175 of 2025
2
Khan vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (2011) 10 SCC 192, it has been
held that the opinion of a radiologist regarding age is not exact and carries
a margin of error of 1–2 years on either side. Furthermore, there is no
medical evidence on record to corroborate the alleged incident.
6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie
the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
7. Let the applicant- Arun, be released on bail on furnishing a personal
bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to
verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not tamper with
evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as
required.
8. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The
observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
April 23, 2026
Siddhant
Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHANT SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…