Allahabad High Court
ROHIT KUMAR @ ROHIT RAOversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Rohit Kumar, accused under Sections 137(2) and 65(1) of the B.N.S. Act and Sections 3 and 4(2) of the POCSO Act for alleged rape of a minor. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, pointing to contradictory victim statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S., inconsistent age records, and a medico‑legal report that did not support the rape allegation. The prosecution highlighted the victim’s claim of forcible abduction and rape, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence. The court, while noting the contradictions and the applicant’s clean record, also considered the overcrowding of jails and the Supreme Court’s recent bail guidelines. Relying on the judgments in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI and Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P., the court granted bail without expressing an opinion on the merits, imposing standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused under the B.N.S. and POCSO statutes despite the seriousness of the alleged offence.
- Whether contradictions in the victim’s statements and lack of corroborative medical evidence warrant bail.
- Whether the applicant’s clean criminal record and jail overcrowding justify bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- minor victim
- contradictory statements
- overcrowded prisons
- criminal procedure
- Section 137 B.N.S.
- Section 65 B.N.S.
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30767 of 2026
Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Rao
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rupa
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Archana Kumari, G.A., Krishna Mani
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Ms. Rupa, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Krishna Mani,
learned counsel for the first informant and Shri O.P. Singh, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 356 of 2026, under Sections 137(2),
65(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station
Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra, 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 there are
material contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under
Sections 180 and 183 BNSS as the victim in her statement recorded under
Section 180 BNSS has stated that she had left her home on her own free
will and she had entered into matrimonial alliance with the applicant and
lived with him as a married couple, whereas, the victim in her statement
recorded under Section 183 BNSS has stated that she was forcibly taken
away by the applicant and committed rape on her. It is further submitted
that there are two different records regarding her age and as per mark-
sheet of Class V, the date of birth of the victim is 01.01.2013 and as per
statement of the principal of the said school, the date of birth of the victim
is 01.01.2012, however, there is no certificate of high school or certificate
of school first attended and no radio-logical examination has been
BAIL No. 30767 of 2026
2
conducted for her age determination. It is further submitted that the
medico legal report does not support the allegation of commission rape
on her. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal
history and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 16.05.2026, in
case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would
cooperate in the trial proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A.
have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted by
them that the victim is a minor girl aged about 14 years and the victim in
her statement has stated that she was forcibly taken away by the applicant
and he committed rape on her.
5. As per first information report, the applicant is said to have enticed
away the daughter of the first informant, however, the victim has been
recovered and there are material contradictions in the statement of the
victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS as the victim in her
statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS has stated that she had left
her home on her own free will and she had entered into matrimonial
alliance with the applicant and lived with him as a married couple,
whereas, the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS
has stated that she was forcibly taken away by the applicant and
committed rape on her. It is further submitted that there are two different
records regarding her age and as per mark-sheet of Class V, the date of
birth of the victim is 01.01.2013 and as per statement of the principal of
the said school, the date of birth of the victim is 01.01.2012, however,
there is no certificate of high school or certificate of school first attended
and no radio-logical examination has been conducted for her age
determination. It is further submitted that the medico legal report does not
support the allegation of commission rape on her. It is further submitted
that the applicant is having no criminal history and the applicant has been
languishing in jail since 16.05.2026.
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
BAIL No. 30767 of 2026
3
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- Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Rao 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, 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
BAIL No. 30767 of 2026
4
ensure early release of the applicant.
12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
Jail Superintendent, Sonbhadra 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.)
October 1, 2026
RKM
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…