Allahabad High Court

FATEH MOHAMMADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 30 September 2026
Bench: ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL

Holding

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Summary

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Fateh Mohammad, who was implicated in a case involving kidnapping, dacoity and alleged rape under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR, that the victim’s statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the CrPC were contradictory, and that the medical report showed no injuries, thereby weakening the prosecution’s case. The State opposed bail but could not refute the factual contradictions. Weighing the inconsistencies, the lack of medical evidence, the filing of a charge‑sheet against other accused, and the applicant’s claim of being a law‑abiding citizen, the Court held that there was no risk of evidence tampering and granted bail with standard conditions. The order directed the issuance of a personal bond, verification of sureties, and electronic transmission of the release order to the jail.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant’s alleged participation in offences under IPC and POCSO warrants denial of bail despite serious nature of the crimes
Whether contradictions in the victim’s statements and absence of medical evidence reduce the risk of tampering or influencing witnesses
Whether the filing of a charge‑sheet against other accused and the applicant’s prior criminal history affect bail eligibility
Whether custodial interrogation is necessary after the charge‑sheet has been filed

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 180, 183, 319
Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366, 376
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 3, 4

Subjects

bail
kidnapping
rape
POCSO
contradictory statements
medical evidence
Criminal Procedure Code
high court

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27551 of 2025

Fateh Mohammad
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Akbar Shah Alam Khan, Mohd.
Monis, Saksham Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Mohammad Faisal Khan

Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

1. Heard Mohd. Akbar Shah Alam Khan, counsel for the applicant, Sri
Mohammad Faisal Khan, counsel for the first informant, Sri Rakesh Kumar
Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail during trial in Case Crime No. 19 of 2021, under Sections
363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station-
Khatauli, District- Muzaffarnagar.

3. Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was not named in
the FIR; subsequently the victim in her statement recorded under Section
180 BNSS clearly stated that she herself left the house along with Jaan
Mohd., to whom she was in relationship; subsequently the victim in her
statement 183 BNSS stated that she was kidnapped by Jaan Mohd. and other
co-accused persons including the applicant, though there was allegation of
rape, but the medical examination report of the victim does not show any
mark of injury or any sign of sexual assault. The police after investigation
submitted charge-sheet against the Jaan Mohd. and Hasrat on 10.03.2021
and implication of the applicant was found to be false; thereafter the
applicant was summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. before the trial court.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that there are serious contradiction in the
statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 and 183 BNSS. It is
further submitted that the medical examination report of the victim does not
substantiate the allegation made in the statement of the victim recorded
BAIL No. 27551 of 2025
2

under Section 183 BNSS. It is further submitted that the applicant has
explained the criminal history of three cases. It is further submitted that
charge sheet has been filed in the present case, therefore, there is no
requirement of custodial interrogation. Therefore, there is no chance of
tempering with the evidence and witnesses. The applicant is a law abiding
citizen and he is languishing in jail since 08.07.2025. In case, he is granted
bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial
proceedings.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but
could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of
learned counsel for the parties; taking into account the contradiction in the
statements of the victim recorded under Section 180 and 183 BNSS; coupled
with medical examination report of the victim and keeping in view the
nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused 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. Accordingly, the bail application is
allowed.

6. Let the applicant- Fateh Mohammad 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.

iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond
executed by him.
BAIL No. 27551 of 2025
3

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

8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

9. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website
of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the
undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

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 on e-prison portal and Trial
Court via e-mode 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 as well as Pila Pahan @ Peela Pahan and others Vs. State of
Jharkhand and another, in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 169 of 2025,
decided on 29.05.2026.

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
October 1, 2026
CS/-

Digitally signed by :-
CHANDAN SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…