Allahabad High Court
AMIT RAJPOOTversusSTATE 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
Amit Rajpoot was arrested in connection with offences under Sections 137(2), 87 and 64 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012, alleged to involve a minor victim. The applicant contended that the alleged victim was a consenting adult who later married him, and that there was no documentary proof of her minority. The State opposed bail but could not refute the applicant's submissions, and the Supreme Court’s precedent in Prabhakar Tewari (2020) was cited to emphasize that pending cases do not bar bail. The trial court, after considering the victim’s statement under Section 183 B.N.S. indicating consent, found a prima facie case for bail. Consequently, the court ordered the release of the applicant on personal bond and sureties, subject to standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused charged under the B.N.S. and POCSO Act when the alleged victim claims to be a consenting adult.
- Whether the existence of pending criminal cases against the accused precludes bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 137(2), 64, 87
- POCSO Act, 2012 — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- consent
- minor
- criminal procedure
- Section 183 B.N.S.
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30842 of 2025
Amit Rajpoot
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gyan Prakash Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.187 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to
the informant has been served on 26.08.2025, but none is present on behalf
of the informant.
2. Heard Sri Gyan Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused
the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Session Trial No.216 of 2025, Case Crime No.344
of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 of BNS and Sections 3/4 of POCSO
Act, 2012, Police Station- Bithoor, District- Kanpur Nagar, 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 a consenting party, as she had gone with the applicant all the way
from Kanpur to Prayagraj and married him. There is no valid documentary
evidence to prove that the victim was minor. The criminal history of one
case assigned to the applicant stands explained. He is in jail since
19.12.2024 and undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the
liberty of bail.
5. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application
but could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.
BAIL No. 30842 of 2025
2
6. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. And Another,
(2020) 11 SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases
against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his
case for bail is made out.
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 statement of the victim recorded under Section 183
B.N.S.S., which indicates her consent, 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- Amit Rajpoot, 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.)
April 23, 2026
(Ravi Kant)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…