Allahabad High Court
VIVEK KUMAR CHAUHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the case is fit for bail and allowed the bail application.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of Vivek Kumar Chauhan, who was arrested in a case involving alleged sexual offences against a 16‑year‑old girl under Sections 87, 137(2), 64(1) of the same Act and provisions of the POCSO Act. The applicant contended that the victim had left home voluntarily, was in a consensual live‑in relationship, and that her age could not be conclusively established as no medical or radiological examination was done. The State argued that the victim’s minority rendered any alleged consent immaterial. The court, after noting the pending trial, the applicant’s prior criminal history, and the lack of definitive age proof, concluded that the matter was suitable for bail and ordered release on a personal bond with strict conditions. The order expressly refrained from commenting on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in a case involving alleged sexual offences against a minor.
- Whether the alleged consent of a minor victim is legally relevant under the applicable statutes.
- Whether the applicant’s prior criminal history and the pendency of the trial justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 180, 183, 483, 64(1), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 5L/6
Subjects
- bail
- minor
- consent
- POCSO Act
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- live‑in relationship
- criminal history
- judicial discretion
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30936 of 2026
Vivek Kumar Chauhan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandra Prakash Misra, Prakash
Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Chandra Prakash Misra, learned counsel for the applicant who
has filed supplementary affidavit which is taken on record, Sri Uma Shankar
Mishra, 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. 40 of 2026 under Sections 87,
137(2), 64(1) BNS, 5L/6 POCSO Act registered at Police Station Pipiganj,
District Gorakhpur 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 the victim in her statements
recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS has stated that she left her home
on her own free will and she was living with the applicant in a live-in
relationship and physical relationship was established between them by
mutual consent. It is further submitted that age of the victim has been found
to be 16 years and 7 months as per certificate of class IVth, however, there is
no certificate of High School or school first attended and no radiological
examination has been conducted for determination of her age. It is further
submitted that the victim has refused to undergo medico-legal
examination. It is further submitted that applicant, who has criminal history
BAIL No. 30936 of 2026
2
of two cases, has been languishing in jail since 03.6.2026 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 and
7 months as per certificate of class IVth and her consent is immaterial.
6. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have enticed away the daughter of the
first informant aged about 16 years, however, she has been recovered. The
victim has stated in her statements recorded under sections 180 and 183
BNSS that she left her home on her own free will and she was living with
the applicant in a live-in relationship and physical relationship was
established between them by mutual consent. The victim has been found to
be aged about 16 years and 7 months as per certificate of class
IVth, however, there is no certificate of High School or school first attended
and no radiological examination has been conducted for determination of her
age. The victim has refused to undergo medico-legal examination.
Applicant, who has criminal history of two cases, has been languishing in
jail since 03.6.2026.
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 Vivek Kumar Chauhan involved in the aforesaid case
crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/-
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
BAIL No. 30936 of 2026
3
the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii)
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 17, 2026
Madhurima
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…