Allahabad High Court
PANKAJ GONDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the bail application is a fit case for bail and allowed the applicant’s release on bond with conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Pankaj Gond, who was arrested in a case registered under Sections 137(2), 64(2)M, 352 of the B.N.S.S and Sections 5L/6 of the POCSO Act alleging rape of a 16‑year‑old girl. The applicant contended that the allegation was false, that the relationship with the victim was consensual, and that the medico‑legal report showed no internal injury. The State argued that the victim, a minor, had expressly alleged rape in her statements recorded under sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S. After reviewing the FIR, statements, and medical report, the court, without expressing a view on the merits, found the case suitable for bail and ordered the applicant’s release on personal bond with two sureties and a set of strict conditions. The order expressly limited its effect to the bail application and did not prejudice the trial court’s future judgment.
Issues considered
- The applicability of Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant bail in a case involving alleged rape of a minor under the POCSO Act.
- Whether the absence of internal injury and the claim of consensual relationship justify bail despite the victim’s allegation of rape.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal record and the pendency of trial are sufficient grounds for bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 483
- Indian Penal Code — s. 137(2), 352, 64(2)M
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 5L, 6
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- minor
- POCSO
- false implication
- evidence
- court conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31021 of 2026
Pankaj Gond
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vipin Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri S.K. Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Vipin Kumar Singh, learned
counsel for the applicant, 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. 191 of 2026 under Sections 137(2), 64(2)M, 352 BNS, 5L/6
POCSO Act registered at Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Mirzapur 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 on perusal of the statements of the victim
recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS and other attending facts and
circumstances of the case, it appears that physical relationship was established
between the victim and the applicant by mutual consent. It is further submitted that
victim is aged about 16 years as per certificate of High School and her medico-legal
report does not support the allegation of commission of rape on her as no internal
injury has been found on her private part. It is further submitted that applicant, who
has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since 30.4.2026 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 certificate
of High School and she has stated in her statements recorded under sections 180 and
183 BNSS that applicant committed rape on her.
BAIL No. 31021 of 2026
2
6. As per the FIR, daughter of the first informant aged about 15 years went missing on
21.4.2026 however, she has been recovered. On perusal of the statements of the victim
recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS and other attending facts and
circumstances of the case, it appears that she established physical relationship with the
applicant on her own free will. The victim is aged about 16 years as per certificate of
High School and her medico-legal report does not support the allegation of
commission of rape on her as no internal injury has been found on her private part.
Applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since 30.4.2026.
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 Pankaj Gond 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) 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.
September 24, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…