Allahabad High Court
BANIYA URF VINODversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail and therefore granted bail.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Baniya Urf Vinod in a POCSO case (Crime No. 193 of 2026) under sections 5m and 6. The FIR was lodged seven days after the alleged incident and there was no medical evidence, although the victim gave a statement against the applicant. The court noted that the applicant had no prior criminal antecedents and, after evaluating the material and counsel submissions, found a prima facie case for bail. Accordingly, the court ordered his release on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions that he not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and must appear before the trial court as required. The court warned that breach of any condition would lead to cancellation of bail, without affecting the trial on merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a POCSO case under sections 5m and 6 despite a seven‑day delay in lodging the FIR
- Whether the absence of medical corroboration affects the grant of bail
- Whether the applicant's clean criminal record warrants bail
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- child sexual abuse
- delay in FIR
- medical evidence
- sureties
- witness intimidation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31555 of 2026
Baniya Urf Vinod
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kunvar Singh, Raghuraj Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 39 out of 185)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Raghuraj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram
Nath, learned counsel for the informatn as well as Sri R.M. Yadav, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 193 of 2026, under Sections 5m/6
POCSO Act, Police Station Bakewar, District Etawah, during the pendency
of trial.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the delay of about seven days in lodging of FIR and the fact
that there is no medical corroboration of the incident, although it is true that
victim has deposed against the applicant; there being no criminal antecedents
to his credit and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
prima facie, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case
for bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
5. Let the applicant- Baniya Urf Vinod, who is involved in aforementioned
case 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
subject to verification of sureties, with the condition that he shall not tamper
with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court
BAIL No. 31555 of 2026
2
as required.
6. Breach of any of the above condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The
observation herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 8, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…