Allahabad High Court
VISHAL YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The Court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail and granted it.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Vishan Yadav, who was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) of the B.N.S.S. and Sections 5L/6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed innocence, asserting that the alleged victim was not pregnant, had refused a medical examination, and had voluntarily accompanied him, as recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the applicant's contentions. The Court noted the absence of medical corroboration and the victim's statement indicating consent, concluding that these factors created a reasonable doubt justifying bail. Consequently, the Court ordered the release of the applicant on personal bond and sureties, subject to conditions to prevent tampering with evidence, intimidation of witnesses, and to ensure appearance before the trial court. The order expressly stated that the bail decision would not prejudice the trial judge's independent assessment of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under the provisions of the B.N.S.S. and POCSO Act in the absence of medical evidence and with a victim's statement indicating consent.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- POCSO Act
- consent
- medical evidence
- trial
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30221 of 2025
Vishal Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jyoti Giri, Prashant Singh, Rang Raj
Giri, Rizwan Ahamad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No. 132 out of 262)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice to the
informant has been served on 8.9.2025.
2. Heard Ms. Jyoti Giri and Sri Rizwan Ahamad, learned counsels for the
applicant as well as Sri R.M. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and
perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 242 of 2025, under Sections
137(2), 87, 64(1) BNS and 5L/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Handia, District
Prayagraj, 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 not pregnant, as is evident from her medical report. She has refused
her medical examination. She is a consenting party as is but evident from her
statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she had gone with
the applicant out of her own sweet will.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no
criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since
4.7.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is
released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but could
BAIL No. 30221 of 2025
2
not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.
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 there is no medical corroboration of the incident
and the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS, whereby she seems
to be consenting party and without expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, 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- Vishal Yadav, who is involved in aforementioned case
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 subject to
following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties
be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant
shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent
opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
April 2, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…