Allahabad High Court

ANKIT @ SACHIN SAROJversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 10 September 2026
Bench: KRISHAN PAHAL

Holding

The Court held that, on a prima facie basis, the applicant had established a right to bail and therefore granted bail.

Summary

The High Court of Allahabad considered bail application No. 28764 of 2026 filed by Ankit @ Sachin Saroj, who was arrested in Crime No.135 of 2026 under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 5M/6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant alleged that the alleged victim, aged 16‑18 as per an ossification test, was a consenting party and that the relationship was consensual between two adolescents. The prosecution opposed bail, but the applicant’s counsel highlighted the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNS Act indicating consent and the applicant’s clean record. The Court examined the material on record and, without expressing a view on the merits, found that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail. Accordingly, the Court ordered the release of the applicant on personal bond and sureties, subject to standard conditions. The order expressly stated that any breach would lead to cancellation of bail and would not affect the trial on merits.

Issues considered

Whether bail can be granted in a case involving alleged offences under the POCSO Act where the alleged victim is a minor but claims consent
Whether the statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNS Act establishes consent sufficient to justify bail
Whether the applicant’s clean criminal record and lack of prior convictions warrant the grant of bail

Legislation cited

BNS Act — s. 183
Indian Penal Code — s. 137(2), 65(2), 87
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 5M, 6

Subjects

bail
POCSO Act
consent
minor
Indian Penal Code
Section 183
criminal procedure
adolescent relationship

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28764 of 2026

Ankit @ Sachin Saroj
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Madhukar Bharti, Prince Kumar
Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashok Kumar Singh, G.A.

Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.36 out of 80 T.C.)

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Prince Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P.
Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material
placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.135 of 2026, under Sections
137(2), 87, 65(2) BNS and Section 5M/6 POCSO Act, Police Station
Koirauna, District Bhadohi, during the pendency of trial.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded
U/s 183 BNSS, whereby she travelled with the applicant to several places,
including Prayagraj and Surat, and had expressed her willingness to stay
with him.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the victim by her
looks seems to be major, although she is stated to be 16-18 years old as per
the ossification test report. The applicant himself is a 18 years old youth.
The matter of consensual relationship between two adolescents has been
converted into a criminal case by the informant. The applicant has no
criminal history and is in jail since 9.7.2026. He undertakes to cooperate
BAIL No. 28764 of 2026
2

with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.

6. Learned counsel for the informant and learned State Law Officer have
vehemently opposed the bail application but the submissions raised by the
learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the fact that victim is a consenting party as is but evident from
her statement recorded U/s 183 BNSS, and without expressing any opinion
on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the
applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

8. Let the applicant- Ankit @ Sachin Saroj, be released on bail in the
aforementioned case crime 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.

9. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 11, 2026
Vikas Verma

Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…