Allahabad High Court
RAJJEET @ RAMJI RAJBHARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Rajjeet @ Ramji Rajbhar, who was charged with rape of a minor girl (aged 13 years 5 months) under sections of the B.N.S., the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, there was no incriminating material, the victim refused a medico‑legal examination and her age was based only on school records without radiological proof, and he had no prior criminal record. The prosecution contended that the victim’s statement under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S. implicated the accused. The court, taking into account the seriousness of the offence, lack of concrete evidence, the applicant’s clean record, jail overcrowding, and precedents such as Kapil Wadhawan v CBI (2025) and Maya Tiwari v State of U.P. (2024), decided to grant bail without commenting on the merits. The bail was ordered subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence, seeking adjournments, or committing further offences. The order also directed verification of identities and prompt release through the Bail Order Management System.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case of alleged rape of a minor under the POCSO, SC/ST and B.N.S. statutes given the absence of medico‑legal evidence and the accused’s claim of false implication.
- Whether the principles laid down in Kapil Wadhawan v CBI and Maya Tiwari v State of U.P. regarding bail in serious offences apply to the present facts.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- minor
- POCSO
- SC/ST Act
- overcrowded prisons
- age determination
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30893 of 2026
Rajjeet @ Ramji Rajbhar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Singh Sengar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sanjay Kumar
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Shri Arvind Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant,
Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the first informant and Shri B.P.
Maurya, 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. 89 of 2026, under Sections 65(1),
351(3),352 of B.N.S. and Section 3/4(2) of POCSO Act and Sections
3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Narhi, District
Ballia, 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 has refused to undergo medico legal examination and the age of the
victim has been found to be 13 years and 5 months as per school records of
Class VII, 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 applicant is
having no criminal history and the applicant has been languishing in jail
since 09.06.2026, 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 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 13 years and 5 months as per
BAIL No. 30893 of 2026
2
school records of Class VII and the victim in her statement recorded
under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has stated that the applicant committed
rape on her.
5. As per first information report, the applicant is said to have committed
rape on the victim aged about 13 yeas, however, the victim has refused to
undergo medico legal examination and the age of the victim has been found
to be 13 years and 5 months as per school records of Class VII, 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 applicant is having no criminal history and
the applicant has been languishing in jail since 09.06.2026.
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- Rajjeet @ Ramji Rajbhar 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
BAIL No. 30893 of 2026
3
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, Ballia 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…