Allahabad High Court
SAGARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sagar, accused under Sections 65(1) and 351(3) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act for alleged rape of a 13‑year‑old girl. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, pointing to contradictions in the victim's statements, lack of proper age verification, and an unsupportive medico‑legal report, while also noting his clean criminal record and prolonged pre‑trial detention since 08‑07‑2026. The prosecution contended that the victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS directly implicated the applicant. The Court, invoking Supreme Court precedents (Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI, Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P.) and the policy on overcrowded jails, decided that the applicant was entitled to bail without expressing a view on the merits. Accordingly, bail was granted subject to personal bond, sureties and strict conditions, with procedural directions for verification and release.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant, accused of rape of a minor under the POCSO Act, is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offence.
- Whether contradictions in the victim’s statements and lack of conclusive medical evidence justify granting bail.
- Whether the principles laid down in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI and Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P. on bail and jail overcrowding apply to the present case.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- minor
- POCSO
- contradictory evidence
- overcrowded jails
- Supreme Court guidelines
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28404 of 2026
Sagar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Adarsh Kumar Singh, Ankit Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Mukesh Chandra Gupta,
Shubham Prakash Gupta
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Shri Ankit Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant,
Shri Mukesh Chandra Gupta along with Shri Shubham Prakash Gupta,
learned counsel for the first informant and Shri Jai Kishan Chaurasia,
learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 177 of 2026, under Sections 65(1),
351(3) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station
Inchauli, District Meerut, during the pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case though there is no
incriminating material against him. It is further submitted that there are
material contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under
Sections 180 and 183 BNSS and the contents of the first information
report. It is further submitted that the age of the victim has been found to
be 13 years and 5 months as per certificate of Class VIII, however, there
is no certificate of high school or certificate of school first attended and
no radio-logical examination has been conducted for her age
determination. It is further submitted that the medico legal report does not
support the allegation of commission rape on her. It is further submitted
that the applicant is having no criminal history and the applicant has been
languishing in jail since 08.07.2026, in case, he is granted bail, he will not
misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
BAIL No. 28404 of 2026
2
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant has opposed the
prayer for bail and it has been submitted by him that the victim is a minor
girl aged about 13 years and the victim in her statement recorded under
Section 183 BNSS has categorically stated that the applicant committed
rape on her.
5. Learned State Law Officer has also opposed the prayer for bail.
6. As per first information report, the applicant is said to have entered into
the terrace of the first informant and committed rape on the victim aged
about 13 years, however, there are material contradictions in the statement
of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS and the contents
of the first information report. It is further submitted that the age of the
victim has been found to be 13 years and 5 months as per certificate of
Class VIII, however, there is no certificate of high school or certificate of
school first attended and no radio-logical examination has been conducted
for her age determination. It is further submitted that the medico legal
report does not support the allegation of commission rape on her. It is
further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history and the
applicant has been languishing in jail since 08.07.2026.
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. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED.
9. Let the applicant- Sagar 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
BAIL No. 28404 of 2026
3
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.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground
for cancellation of bail.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
Jail Superintendent, Meerut 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 9, 2026
RKM
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…