Allahabad High Court
LOKENDRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court granted bail to the applicant, finding a prima facie case for release.
Summary
Lokendra applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 391 of 2025) involving alleged offences under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) of the BNS Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. The victim, aged about 17, recorded a statement under Section 183 of the BNSS indicating consent to the proposed marriage, though her mother objected on caste grounds. The court noted that radiological age estimates have a margin of error and that no medical evidence corroborated the alleged crime. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that such expert opinions are not conclusive, the court found a prima facie case for bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed, subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged offences under the BNS Act and the POCSO Act given the victim's alleged consent and age.
- Whether the lack of medical evidence and the margin of error in radiological age determination affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- consent
- age determination
- POCSO
- caste
- medical evidence
- prima facie
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27241 of 2025
Lokendra
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishe Pandey, Rajendra Prasad, Ravi
Shankar Shukla, Sushil Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Momraj, Vivek Sharma
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No. 138 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Rajendra Prasad and Sri Sushil Kumar Sharma, learned
counsels for the applicant and Sri Vivek Sharma, learned counsel for the
informant as well as Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer
and also perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 391 of 2025, under Sections
137(2), 87, 64(1) of BNS and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police
Station - Civil Lines, District - Moradabad, during the pendency of trial.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that
the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, prima
facie indicates her consent, as she has stated that her mother has objected
to the proposed marriage with the applicant solely on account of his
different caste. As per the ossification test report, the victim is stated to be
about 17 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
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.
5. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie
BAIL No. 27241 of 2025
2
the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
6. Let the applicant- Lokendra, 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.
7. 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…