Allahabad High Court
PRASHANT KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the case was fit for bail and allowed the bail application.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of Prashant Kumar, who was charged under Sections 87, 137(2), 64(1) of the same Act and Sections 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed false implication, noting that the alleged victim was 17 years, 11 months and 29 days old and that there were material contradictions in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S. He had no prior criminal record and had been in custody since 22‑08‑2025. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the victim’s detailed statement. After reviewing the record, the Court found the case suitable for bail, ordered release on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties, and imposed standard conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses. The order expressly limited its scope to the bail application and did not comment on the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 despite the seriousness of the charges under the POCSO Act.
- Whether the contradictions in the victim’s statements and the accused’s lack of criminal history justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 180, 183, 483, 64(1), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 3, 4(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- POCSO
- false implication
- victim age
- contradictory statements
- court conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32638 of 2025
Prashant Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Giri Ram Rawat, Indra Deo Mishra, Sangeeta
Yadav, Shri Ram (Rawat), Sofia Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Deepak Kumar Kulshrestha, G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Indra Deo Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Deepak Kumar
Kulshrestha, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Shiv Dutt Shukla, 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. 251 of 2025 under Sections 87, 137(2), 64(1) BNS and section
3/4 (2) of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Trans Yamuna, District Agra
during pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the victim is aged about 17
years 11 months and 29 days on the alleged date of occurrence as per her High School
marksheet which is just one day less than 18 years. It is further submitted that there
are material contradictions in statements of the victim recorded under sections 180 and
183 BNSS. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history and he has
been languishing in jail since 22.8.2025. It is also submitted that the applicant
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.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant as well as learned A.G.A.
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submit that the victim has
specifically narrated the incident in her statement recorded under section 183 BNSS.
5. The victim is aged about 17 years 11 months and 29 days on the alleged date of
occurrence as per her High School marksheet. There are material contradictions in
statements of the victim recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS. As per the FIR
which has been lodged against unknown, some unknown person is said to have
enticed away the daughter of the first informant, however, during investigation, she
BAIL No. 32638 of 2025
2
was recovered. Applicant has no criminal history and he has been languishing in jail
since 22.8.2025.
6. 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.
7. Let the applicant Prashant Kumar 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.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
9. 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.
April 23, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…