Allahabad High Court
VISHAL YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The court allowed the bail application, granting bail to the accused with conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Vishan Yadav, who was accused in a rape case involving a minor girl aged about 16 years. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR or the victim's statement under Section 180, and that the medico‑legal report did not support the allegation, while the prosecution highlighted the seriousness of the offence and the victim's age. The court examined whether the presence of the applicant's name in the victim's statement under Section 183, the lack of corroborative medical evidence, and the applicant's clean criminal record justified granting bail. After reviewing the facts and noting the heavy pendency of cases, the judge concluded that the case was suitable for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits. Accordingly, bail was granted subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and strict conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses. The order expressly limited its scope to the bail application and did not prejudice the trial court's future findings.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, when the accused is named only in the victim's statement under Section 183 and not in the FIR.
- Whether the nature of the alleged offence (rape of a minor) warrants denial of bail despite lack of supporting medico‑legal evidence.
- Whether the applicant's clean criminal record and the pendency of the trial justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 483, 64(1), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- minor victim
- Section 483
- POCSO Act
- false implication
- medico‑legal report
- court pendency
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30730 of 2026
Vishal Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Yakub Ali
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Yakub Ali, learned counsel for the applicant who has filed
supplementary affidavit which is taken on record, Sri O.P. Singh, learned
AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer
to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 373 of 2026 under Sections 87,
137(2), 64(1) BNS and 3/4 POCSO Act registered at Police Station Ko
Padrauna, District Kushinagar during pendency of the trial.
3. At the very outset, learned A.G.A. states that notice has been served upon
the first informant.
4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case and he is neither named in the
FIR nor in the statement of the victim recorded under section 180 BNSS.
However, for the first time, name of the applicant appears in the statement of
the victim recorded under section 183 BNSS in which, she has stated that
she was in contact with the applicant for the last one year and he committed
rape on her. It is further submitted that age of the victim has been found to
be 16 years as per ossification test and 16 years 6 months as per certificate of
class VIIth, however, there is no certificate of High School or school first
attended. It is further submitted that medico-legal report of the victim does
not support the allegation of commission of rape on her. It is further
submitted that applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing
BAIL No. 30730 of 2026
2
in jail since 11.7.2026 and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty,
if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of
cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail to
the applicant and submits that victim is a minor girl aged about 16 years as
per ossification test and 16 years 6 months as per certificate of class VIIth.
6. FIR has been lodged against unknown alleging therein that daughter of the
first informant had gone missing, however, she has been recovered. The
applicant is neither named in the FIR nor in the statement of the victim
recorded under section 180 BNSS. However, for the first time, name of the
applicant appears in the statement of the victim recorded under section 183
BNSS in which she has stated that she was in contact with the applicant for
the last one year and he called her and committed rape on her. The victim is
aged about 16 years as per ossification test and 16 years 6 months as per
certificate of class VIIth, however, there is no certificate of High School or
school first attended. Medico-legal report of the victim does not support the
allegation of commission of rape on her. Applicant, who has no criminal
history, has been languishing in jail since 11.7.2026.
7. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected
from record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find
it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED.
8. Let the applicant Vishal Yadav involved in the aforesaid case crime be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with 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 not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on
the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii)
BAIL No. 30730 of 2026
3
recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek
any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are
present in the trial court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date
fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an
expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free
to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led
unaffected by anything said in this order.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
September 23, 2026
Madhurima
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…