Allahabad High Court

RAJ KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 28 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 under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for Raj Kumar who was charged under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the same Act and Sections 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed false implication, highlighted a discrepancy in the victim's age (recorded as 16 but actually 13 years 9 months), and asserted no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, noting the alleged enticement of a minor. The Court, taking into account the nature of the offences, the evidence, jail overcrowding, and precedents such as Kapil Wadhawan v CBI (2025) and Maya Tiwari v State of U.P. (2024), granted bail with strict conditions. The order directed verification of identities, bond execution, and procedural compliance for early release.

Issues considered

Whether the accused is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 despite charges under the POCSO Act.
Whether the age discrepancy of the alleged victim and the claim of false implication affect the bail decision.
Whether jail overcrowding and precedent cases justify granting bail in this circumstance.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 483, 65(1), 87
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 3/4(2)

Subjects

bail
POCSO
minor victim
overcrowded jails
Section 483 BNS
false implication
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27332 of 2026

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

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : M.P.S. Chauhan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard Sri M.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.P.
Singh, 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 137(2),
87, 65(1) BNS, 3/4(2) POCSO Act registered at Police Station Sikandra Rao,
District Hathras during pendency of the trial.

3. At the very outset, learned A.G.A. states that notice has been served upon
the first informant.

4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case and on perusal of the statements of the
victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it appears that she was
in love with the applicant and they lived together as a married couple with
mutual consent. It is further submitted that age of the victim has been
mentioned as 16 years as per the FIR as well as in the statements of the
victim, however, she is aged about 13 years and 9 months as per her
certificate of school first attended. It is further submitted that victim has
refused to undergo medico-legal examination. It is also submitted that
applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since
17.6.2026. 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. 27332 of 2026
2

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail to
the applicant.

6. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have enticed away the daughter of the
first informant aged about 16 years, however, she has been recovered. On
perusal of the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183
BNSS, it appears that she was in love with the applicant and they lived
together as a married couple with mutual consent. The age of the victim has
been mentioned as 16 years in the FIR as well as in the statements of the
victim, however, she is aged about 13 years and 9 months as per her
certificate of school first attended and she has refused to undergo medico-
legal examination. Applicant, who has no criminal history, has been
languishing in jail since 17.6.2026.

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. 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.
BAIL No. 27332 of 2026
3

(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
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…