Allahabad High Court
FAIZANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that prima facie the applicant has made out a case for bail and allowed the bail.
Summary
The applicant, Faizan, was charged under IPC sections 65(1) and 351(2) and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act for allegedly raping his 13‑year‑old domestic helper on 18 April 2025. The prosecution alleged repeated sexual assaults, while the defence argued that the FIR was filed more than a month after the alleged incident, there was no medical evidence, and the victim appeared physically mature. The informant and the State contended that the victim’s minor status precluded bail. The court examined the delay in filing the FIR, the absence of medical corroboration, and the applicant’s clean record, and, without passing on the merits, found a prima facie case for bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to personal bond, sureties, and standard conditions. The order emphasized 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 POCSO‑related rape case where the victim is a minor and the FIR is delayed.
- Whether the lack of medical evidence and the appellant’s claim of innocence justify bail.
- Whether the applicant’s age and clean criminal record outweigh the seriousness of the alleged offences.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 351(2), 65(1)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- rape
- minor
- delay in FIR
- medical evidence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29918 of 2025
Faizan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Singh, Amar Jeet
Upadhyay, Arnab Banerji, Irshad
Mohamad, Noor Mohammad, Shitlesh
Pandey, Shivendra Nath Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Uttar Kumar Goswami
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.89 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Shitlesh Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Uttar
Kumar Goswami, learned counsel for the informant, 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.122 of 2025, under Sections 65(1),
351(2) BNS and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Bhojpur, District
Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecutions story, the applicant is stated to have raped his
domestic helper/victim on 18.04.2025 and had even raped her several times
before.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
FIR is delayed by more than one month, and there is no explanation for the
said delay. There is no medical corroboration of the incident either. It is true
that the victim was 13 years old as per school certificate, but by her physical
appearance, she seems to be major. The applicant has no criminal history
and is in jail since 23.05.2025. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and
not misuse the liberty of bail.
BAIL No. 29918 of 2025
2
6. Learned counsel for the informant and learned State Law Officer have
vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the victim was
minor, aged about 13 years old. As per school certificate of Class VII, her
date of birth is 08.09.2011; as such, the applicant, who is major aged about
19 years, is not entitled to bail. The statement of the victim is consistent at
every stage.
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 delay in the institution of the FIR and the fact that there is
no medical corroboration of the incident, 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- Faizan, 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.
9. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 6, 2026
(Ravi Kant)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…