Allahabad High Court
SAHIL RAJBHARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sahil Rajbhar, who was arrested in a case under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the BNS and Section 18 of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed false implication, asserting that the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS indicated she left home voluntarily and made no accusation against him. The State opposed bail, emphasizing that the victim was a minor aged 13. After evaluating the nature of the offence, the victim’s statement, and the applicant’s lack of prior criminal record, the court found the case suitable for bail. The court ordered the release of the applicant on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of non‑tampering with evidence, non‑intimidation of witnesses, and regular appearance before the trial court. The order does not affect the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged under Sections 137(2), 87 of the BNS and Section 18 of the POCSO Act when the alleged victim is a minor.
- Whether the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS negates the prosecution’s case and warrants bail.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal history and custodial status influence the bail decision.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- child victim
- false implication
- sureties
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32851 of 2026
Sahil Rajbhar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Kumar Pal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vinay Kumar Mishra
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 93 out of 208)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the applicant and
Sri Vinay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant, as well as Sri
V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material
placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 69 of 2026, under Sections
137(2), 87 of BNS and Section 18 of POCSO Act, Police Station -
Rampur, District - Mau, during the pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the victim, in her
statement recorded u/s 183 of BNSS, has not whispered a single word
against the applicant. On the contrary, she has categorically stated that she
left her house of her own volition and stayed at the railway station. It is
further submitted that the applicant has no prior criminal history and has
been languishing in jail since 29.07.2026.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA have
opposed the bail application by submitting that the victim was 13 years old
only.
6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the
submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the nature of
the offence, the severity of the punishment, and particularly the statement of
BAIL No. 32851 of 2026
2
the victim recorded u/s 183 of BNSS, this Court prima facie finds it a fit
case to release the applicant on bail.
7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Sahil
Rajbhar, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties
to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties,
with the conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate
witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.
8. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
September 23, 2026
Siddhant
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHANT SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…