Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

VIKASHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail.

Summary

The applicant Vikash filed a bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking release in a criminal case (Crime No. 198 of 2026) that alleged offences under Sections 87, 137(2), 351(3), 64(1) of the BNS and Sections 5N/6 of the POCSO Act. The victim, aged about 17 years, had recorded statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNS stating she entered into a matrimonial alliance with the applicant of her own free will and refused a medico‑legal examination. The applicant contended he was falsely implicated, had no prior criminal record, and had been in custody since 19 June 2026, while the State opposed bail. The court examined the evidence, noted the victim’s age and the lack of a medical examination, and without passing on the merits, deemed the case suitable for bail. Accordingly, the court granted bail on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a case involving alleged offences under the BNS and POCSO Act.
  • Whether the victim's age and refusal to undergo a medico‑legal examination affect the bail decision.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • POCSO
  • false implication
  • victim age
  • conditions of bail

Judgment

              HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

          CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31608 of 2026

Vikash
                                                                       .....Applicant(s)
                                        Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                                  .....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                             :    Hemlata Kushwaha
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                        :    G.A.

Court No. - 67
                    HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

1. Heard Ms. Hemlata Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashish Kumar
Tripathi, 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. 198 of 2026 under Sections 87, 137(2), 351(3), 64(1) BNS,
5N/6 POCSO Act registered at Police Station Tajganj, District Agra 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 and entered into
matrimonial alliance with the applicant on her own free will. It is further submitted
that age of the victim has been found to be 17 years as per ossification test and 16
years 2 months as per school records of class VIth. It is further submitted that victim
has refused to undergo medico-legal examination. It is further submitted that
applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since 19.6.2026
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.

6. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have enticed away the daughter of the first
informant, however, she has been recovered. The victim has stated in her statements
recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS that she left her home and entered into
matrimonial alliance with the applicant on her own free will. The victim has been
                                                                                                     BAIL No. 31608 of 2026
                                                                         2

                                    found to be aged about 17 years as per ossification test and 16 years 2 months as per
                                    school records of class VIth. The victim has refused to undergo medico-legal
                                    examination. Applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail
                                    since 19.6.2026.

                                    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 Vikash 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 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 23, 2026
                                    Madhurima
                                                                                            (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.