Allahabad High Court
VIPINversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted as the applicant was not nominated by the victim and the case was prima facie fit for release.
Summary
Vipin applied for bail in criminal case No.109 of 2026, which involved offences under Sections 137(2), 143(4), 98, 61(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 16 and 17 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The applicant was not named by the victim in statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S. The court examined the material on record, the submissions of counsel, and noted that there was no nomination by the victim. Finding that the case was prima facie fit for bail and that the applicant could be released subject to conditions, the court granted bail. The bail was conditioned on a personal bond, two sureties, and a prohibition on tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses, with a warning that breach would lead to cancellation.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused during the pendency of trial for offences under the B.N.S. and POCSO Act.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 137(2), 143(4), 61(2), 98
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 — s. 16, 17
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- POCSO Act
- evidence tampering
- witness intimidation
- trial pendency
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29787 of 2026
Vipin
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Siddharth Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Dhiraj Singh, G.A., Praveen Kumar Shukla
Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.59 out of 80 T.C.)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Shivam Shukla, Advocate holding brief of Sri Siddharth Shukla, learned
counsel for the applicant, Sri Sri Siddh Nath Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri
Praveen Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Uma Shaker Mishra,
learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.109 of 2026, under Sections 137(2), 143(4),
98, 61(2) B.N.S. and Section 16/17 of P.O.C.S.O. Act, 2012, Police Station-
Robertsganj, District- Sonbhadra, during the pendency of trial.
4. 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
the applicant has not been nominated by the victim in her statements recorded u/s 180
and 183 B.N.S.S., and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima
facie I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail
application is allowed.
5. Let the applicant- Vipin, be released on bail 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.
6. 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
(Ravi Kant)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…