Allahabad High Court

KARAN KASHYAPversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 22 September 2026
Bench: YOGESH DUBEY JOINT REGISTRAR JUDICIAL

Holding

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Karan Kashyap, who was arrested in connection with a case under sections of the B.N.S., the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act alleging sexual relations with a minor. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, had no criminal record, and that the victim’s statements indicated a consensual marriage and a child, while the prosecution highlighted the victim’s age as 12 years 6 months based on school records. The court examined the conflicting age evidence, the seriousness of the offences, and the statutory presumption of innocence, while also taking into account the Supreme Court’s recent guidelines on bail in similar cases. Relying on the judgments of Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI (2025) and Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P. (2024), the court emphasized the need to balance individual liberty with the interests of justice and jail overcrowding. Consequently, the court granted bail to the applicant subject to a personal bond, sureties and strict conditions, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged under the POCSO Act, SC/ST Act and B.N.S. when the alleged victim is a minor with conflicting age records.
Whether the applicant’s claim of false implication and lack of criminal history outweighs the seriousness of the alleged offences.
Whether the Supreme Court’s recent bail jurisprudence applies to this case.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 137(2), 180, 183, 65(1), 87
POCSO Act — s. 5(2)
SC/ST Act — s. 3(2)5

Subjects

bail
POCSO
minor
sexual offence
SC/ST Act
criminal procedure
age of consent
judicial discretion

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30668 of 2026

Karan Kashyap
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohit Kumar Singh, Sujata Choudhary
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

1. Heard Smt. Sujata Choudhary, learned counsel for the applicant and
Shri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. At
the very outset, learned AGA submits that the notice has been served on
the first informant.

2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 151 of 2025, under Sections 137(2),
65(1), 87 of B.N.S. and Section 5(2) J/6 of POCSO Act and Sections
3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station Siyana, District Bulandshahr, during
the pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case though there is no
incriminating material against him. It is further submitted that the victim in
her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has stated that she
had left her home on her own free will and she had entered into matrimonial
alliance with the applicant with her free consent and she is mother of a child
of 2 months. It is further submitted that the age of the victim has been found
to be 16 years as per statement of the victim and the age of the victim has
been found to be 15 years as per FIR and the age of the victim has been
found to be 12 years and 6 months as per school records of Class II,
however, there is no certificate of high school or certificate of school first
attended. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal
history and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 01.04.2026, in
BAIL No. 30668 of 2026
2

case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would
cooperate in the trial proceedings.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail
and it has been submitted by him that the victim is a minor girl aged about
12 years and 6 months as per school records of Class II.

5. As per first information report, the applicant is said to have enticed
away the daughter of the first informant, however, the the victim in her
statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has stated that she had
left her home on her own free will and she had entered into matrimonial
alliance with the applicant with her free consent and she is mother of a child
of 2 months from the said wedlock. It is further submitted that the age of the
victim has been found to be 16 years as per statement of the victim and the
age of the victim has been found to be 15 years as per FIR and the age of the
victim has been found to be 12 years and 6 months as per school records of
Class II, however, there is no certificate of high school or certificate of
school first attended. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no
criminal history and the applicant has been languishing in jail since
01.04.2026.

6. 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 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.

7. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED.

8. Let the applicant- Karan Kashyap 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,
BAIL No. 30668 of 2026
3

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.

9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.

10. 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.

11. 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.

12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
Jail Superintendent, Bulandshahr 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.

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
September 23, 2026
RKM

Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…