Allahabad High Court
BHURE URF MOHAMMAD HASANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Bhure Urf Mohammad Hasan, accused under Sections 87, 70(2), 127(2) of the BNS Act and Sections 5(G) and 6 of the POCSO Act for alleged gang rape of a 17‑year‑old girl. The applicant argued that the FIR was lodged after a seven‑month delay, that the victim’s medical examination did not support a rape, and that his statements to the doctor contradicted her police statements, contending false implication and no prior criminal record. The State relied on the victim’s statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, asserting the seriousness of the offence. Referring to Supreme Court precedents in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI (2025) and Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P. (2024), as well as the 2021 policy on bail, the Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail despite the grave nature of the charges. Accordingly, bail was granted with a personal bond, two sureties, and strict conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or further criminal activity.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant, accused of gang rape of a minor under the BNS and POCSO Acts, is entitled to bail pending trial.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the contradictory statements of the victim affect the bail decision.
- Whether the seriousness of the offence outweighs considerations of jail overcrowding and the applicant’s lack of criminal history.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- gang rape
- POCSO
- false implication
- delay in FIR
- jail overcrowding
- Supreme Court guidelines
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28985 of 2026
Bhure Urf Mohammad Hasan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sarvajeet Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Sarvajeet Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and
Sri O.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the
record. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to
release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 101 of 2026, under
Sections 87, 70(2), 127(2) of BNS and Section 5(G)/6 of POCSO
Act, Police Station Dataganj, District Budaun, during the pendency
of the trial.
3. At the very outset, learned AGA submits that notice has been
served on the first informant.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and the
FIR has been lodged after a delay of seven months. It is further
submitted that the victim before the doctor has stated that no rape
was committed on her, however, in her statement under Section
180 and 183 BNSS has stated that the applicant and co-accused
Rahul committed gang rape on her. It is further submitted that co-
accused Rahul has already been granted bail by this Court. It is
submitted that the age of the victim has been found to be 17 years
as per her radio-logical examination and the date of birth of the
victim is 15.4.2009 as per her certificate of Class 8th, however,
BAIL No. 28985 of 2026
2
there is no High School certificate or the certificate of school first
attended. It is further submitted that the medico-legal report of the
victim does not support the commission of rape on her. It is also
submitted that the applicant has been languishing in jail since
1.5.2026 and he is having no criminal history. It is lastly submitted
that in case the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the
liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer
for bail, however, it is submitted that the the victim in her statement
recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has supported the
allegations of commission of rape on her.
6. As per the allegation in the FIR which has been lodged after a
delay of seven months, the applicant and co-accused Rahul are
said to have committed gang rape on the victim, however, the
victim before the doctor has stated that no rape was committed on
her whereas she in her statement under Section 180 and 183
BNSS has stated that the applicant and co-accused Rahul
committed gang rape on her. The age of the victim has been found
to be 17 years as per her radio-logical examination and the date of
birth of the victim is 15.4.2009 as per her certificate of Class 8th,
however, there is no High School certificate or the certificate of
school first attended. The medico-legal report of the victim does
not support the commission of rape on her. Co-accused Rahul has
already been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has been
languishing in jail since 1.5.2026 and he is having no criminal
history.
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
BAIL No. 28985 of 2026
3
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- Bhure Urf Mohammad Hasan 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.
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.
BAIL No. 28985 of 2026
4
13. 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.
September 9, 2026
Abhishek
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…