Allahabad High Court

RAJ KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: YOGESH DUBEY JOINT REGISTRAR JUDICIAL

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for Raj Kumar, who was charged with offences under Sections 64(1), 137(2), 87, 115(2) of the same Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, the FIR was lodged six months after the alleged incident, the victim’s statements did not incriminate him, and he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the sexual offence charges. Relying on the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Kapil Wadhawan (2025) and Maya Tiwari (2024) regarding bail in serious offences and considering jail overcrowding, the court granted bail without commenting on the merits. The order imposed standard bail conditions and directed verification of identities and prompt release through the Bail Order Management System.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita despite charges under the BNS Act and the POCSO Act.
Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the absence of incriminating statements by the victim justify granting bail.
Whether the applicant’s clean criminal record and the issue of jail overcrowding warrant bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 137(2), 483, 64(1), 87
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 3, 4

Subjects

bail
sexual offences
POCSO
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
false implication
jail overcrowding
trial pendency

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27287 of 2026

Raj Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohammad Zafar Yab Khan, Shahroze
Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi

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

1. Heard Sri Shahroze Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vijay
Prakash Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Ashish
Kumar Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the
record.

2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer
to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 68 of 2026 under Sections 64(1),
137(2), 87, 115(2) BNS and 3/4 of POCSO Act registered at Police Station
Trilokpur, District Siddharth Nagar during pendency of the trial.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case and as per FIR itself, the alleged
incident took place six months ago and the FIR regarding commission of
rape has been file after delay of six months. It is further submitted that
victim has not stated anything against the applicant in her statement recorded
under Sections 180 BNSS. It is further submitted that age of the victim has
been found to be 17 years 10 months and 22 days as per certificate of High
School and 19 years as per ossification test and medico-legal report of the
victim does not support commission of rape on her. It is also submitted that
applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since
19.5.2026. It is lastly submitted that in case applicant is granted bail, he will
not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
BAIL No. 27287 of 2026
2

4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first
informant opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.

5. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have committed rape on the victim six
months ago, however, the victim has not stated anything against the
applicant in her statement recorded under Sections 180 BNSS. The victim
has been found to be aged about 17 years 10 months and 22 days as per
certificate of High School and 19 years as per ossification test and medico-
legal report of the victim does not support commission of rape on her.
Applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since
19.5.2026.

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. Let the applicant Raj Kumar involved in 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.
BAIL No. 27287 of 2026
3

(iv) The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond
executed by him.

8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. 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 29, 2026
Madhurima

Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…