Allahabad High Court
YUSUFversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The bail application is dismissed as the applicant is not entitled to bail.
Summary
The applicant, Yusuf, sought bail in a case under Sections 64(2)(Ka) and 351(3) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3, 4, and 5J(ii) of the POCSO Act, alleging that a DNA report showed he was not the biological father of the victim's child. The State opposed bail, emphasizing that eight witnesses had already been examined and the victim had unequivocally identified the applicant as the perpetrator. The court noted that the trial was at its conclusive stage and the victim's testimony, together with the completed witness evidence, outweighed the new DNA evidence. Consequently, the court found the bail application devoid of merit and rejected it. The judgment also directed the trial court to dispose of the pending case expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments, clarifying that the bail order does not prejudice the trial's merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on the ground of DNA evidence negating paternity.
- Whether the victim's categorical deposition and the completion of witness testimony preclude the grant of bail.
- Whether the bail application is meritless in light of the stage of the trial.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- DNA evidence
- paternity
- POCSO Act
- victim testimony
- trial stage
- criminal law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31313 of 2026
Yusuf
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Om Prakash Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.1 out of 185)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Om Prakash Singh, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Sanjeev
Singh, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Ram Mohit
Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first one
was rejected by this Court vide order dated 8.4.2026 passed in Criminal
Misc. Bail Application No.11870 of 2026.
4. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime
No.304 of 2025, under Sections 64(2)(Ka), 351(3) B.N.S., Section 3/4, 5J(ii)
POCSO Act, Police Station Kiratpur, District Bijnor with the prayer to
enlarge him on bail.
5. As a new ground, learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the
DNA report received from the FSL, Moradabad, indicates that the applicant
is not the biological father of the offspring given birth to by the victim. As
such, the applicant, who is languishing in jail since 20.11.2025, having no
criminal antecedent to his credit, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. He
undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General has vehemently opposed
the bail application on the ground that already eight witnesses have been
examined and the conclusion reached regarding the paternity of the offspring
BAIL No. 31313 of 2026
2
of the victim cannot be held to be conclusive proof of the offence committed
with the victim, who has categorically stated that it was the applicant who
had committed the said offence with her. As such, the applicant is not
entitled to bail.
7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into
consideration the fact that the trial is at its conclusive end as already eight
witnesses have been examined coupled with the fact that victim has
categorically deposed against the applicant, I do not find it a fit case for
grant of bail to the applicant.
8. The instant bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly,
rejected.
9. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial
court be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law, without granting
unnecessary adjournment to either party, if there is no legal impediment.
10. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts
brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and
the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case
during trial.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 8, 2026
Vikas Verma
Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…