Allahabad High Court
AJAY YADAV @ VIJAYversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for Ajay Yadav, who was charged under Sections 137(2), 65(1) of the same Act and Sections 5M/6 of the POCSO Act for allegedly enticing a minor. The applicant claimed false implication, highlighted inconsistencies in the victim's age as recorded in school records, statements, and the FIR, and noted the absence of a medical examination. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged offence and the applicant's prior criminal history of ten cases. The Court, taking into account the nature of the offence, evidentiary gaps, jail overcrowding, and Supreme Court precedents (Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI and Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P.), decided that the applicant was entitled to bail. Bail was granted subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and specific conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and further criminal activity.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted under Section 483 BNS for an alleged sexual offence involving a minor under the POCSO Act despite evidentiary inconsistencies and the accused's criminal history
- Whether the age dispute of the victim and lack of medical examination affect the bail decision
- Whether jail overcrowding and Supreme Court guidelines mandate a more liberal approach to bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 483, 65(1)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 5M, 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- age of victim
- criminal history
- overcrowded jails
- Section 483 BNS
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31022 of 2026
Ajay Yadav @ Vijay
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of Up And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Saroj Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Saroj Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant who has
filed second supplementary affidavit today which is taken on record, Sri B.P.
Maurya, 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. 215 of 2026 under Sections 137(2),
65(1) BNS, 5M/6 POCSO Act registered at Police Station Mahuakherda,
District Aligarh 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 is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case and the victim has not stated anything
regarding commission of sexual assault in her statements recorded under
Sections 180 and 183 BNSS. It is further submitted that age of the victim has
been found to be 10 years 11 months as per school records of class VIIIth,
however, there is no High School certificate or the certificate of school first
attended and no radio-logical examination has been conducted for her age
determination. It is further submitted that the victim has stated her age as 12
years in her statements and in the FIR, her age is mentioned as 13 years,
therefore, the age mentioned in the school records of class VIIIth is not
reliable. It is also submitted that applicant has criminal history of ten cases
which has been duly explained in the memo of application and he has been
BAIL No. 31022 of 2026
2
languishing in jail since 11.6.2026. It is lastly submitted that in case
applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would
cooperate in the trial proceedings.
5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail to
the applicant.
6. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have enticed away the daughter of the
first informant aged about 13 years, however, she has been recovered. The
victim has not stated anything regarding commission of sexual assault in her
statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS whereas she has
stated that she left her home on her own free will and she was in love with
the applicant. Medico-legal report of the victim does not support
commission of rape on her. The victim has been found to be aged about 10
years 11 months as per school records of class VIIIth, however, there is no
High School certificate or the certificate of school first attended and no
radio-logical examination has been conducted for her age determination. The
victim has given her age as 12 years in her statements and in the FIR, her
age is mentioned as 13 years. Applicant has criminal history of ten cases
which has been duly explained in the memo of application and he has been
languishing in jail since 11.6.2026.
7. 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.
8. Let the applicant Ajay Yadav @ Vijay 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:-
BAIL No. 31022 of 2026
3
(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 ensure
early release of the applicant.
12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
concerned Jail Superintendent 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
Madhurima
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…