Allahabad High Court
YOG SAGAR ALIAS BACHCHUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- AJAY BHANOT
Holding
The Court granted bail to the accused, subject to personal bond, sureties and conditions, without prejudice to his defence.
Summary
Yog Sagar, accused under IPC Section 376 and POCSO Act Sections 3 and 4, had been in jail since July 2023. After a first bail application was rejected, a second application was filed arguing that he is a law‑abiding citizen, has cooperated with the investigation, faces no risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, and that discrepancies exist regarding the victim's age. The counsel highlighted that only three witnesses have been examined, the victim may have produced false documents, and continued detention would impair his defence and be punitive. The Court, without addressing the merits of the underlying offence, allowed the bail application, directing release on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of non‑tampering and regular appearance. The order also warned that bail could be cancelled if the accused adopts dilatory tactics or fails to cooperate.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused charged with rape under IPC 376 and offences under the POCSO Act pending trial.
- Whether there is a risk of the accused tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.
- Whether the accused poses a flight risk.
- Whether discrepancies in the victim's age and alleged false documents affect the bail decision.
- Whether continued incarceration would be punitive and contrary to principles of fairness in criminal procedure.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- POCSO
- witness tampering
- flight risk
- minority victim
- criminal procedure
- Indian Penal Code
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33779 of 2025
Yog Sagar Alias Bachchu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Birendra Singh, Pushpendra Singh,
Swati Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 46
HON'BLE AJAY BHANOT, J.
Matter is taken up in the revised call. This is the second bail
application.
By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be
enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.- 28 of 2023 at Police Station
Naraini, District- Banda under Section 376 IPC and Section 3/4
of POCSO Act. The applicant is languishing in jail since
06.07.2023.
The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this
Court on 20.05.2024.
The following arguments made by Ms. Swati Singh, learned
counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be
satisfactorily refuted by Sri Rishi Chaddha, learned AGA-I from
the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:
1. The applicant is a law abiding citizen who cooperated in the
investigation and has joined the trial proceedings. The applicant
never tampered with the evidence nor influenced any witness.
2. The applicant never adopted any dilatory tactics or impeded
the process of the trial.
3. Status report sent by the trial court records that only three
BAIL No. 33779 of 2025
2
witnesses have been examined till date.
4. The victim as well as the principal witnesses of fact including
the victim has already been examined.
5. There is no possibility of the applicant in influencing the
aforesaid witnesses.
6. During the course of prosecution evidences various
discrepancies regarding the age of the victim and in particular
her minority status have come forth.
7. Continued incarceration of the applicant will disable him from
crafting an effective defence strategy and prevent him from
gathering evidence in his support and tendering the same before
the learned trial court to establish his innocence. Further
detention of the applicant will be detrimental to his defence in
the trial and inconsistent with the norms of fairness in criminal
processual jurisprudence. In fact such detention of the applicant
in these facts will be punitive in nature. [Ref: Prabhat
Gangwar v. State of U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail Application
No. 2586 of 2023), Asha v. State of U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No.13193 of 2025 and Vikas Kanjad v. State of
U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19170 of 2025)]
8. The victim has produced false documents regarding her age
only to implicate the applicant under the stringent provision of
the POCSO Act. The applicant has been advised to produce
defence evidence to establish the majority of the victim.
9. The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from
the instant case.
10. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law
abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and
undertakes to cooperate with the trial proceedings. There is no
possibility of the applicant influencing witnesses, tampering
with the evidence or reoffending.
BAIL No. 33779 of 2025
3
In wake of the preceding discussion and without making any
observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is
allowed.
It is clarified that the submissions regarding the defence are
without prejudice to the accused and the defence proposed to be
tendered on his behalf without being limited or influenced by
this order.
Let the applicant- Yog Sagar @ Bachchu be released on bail in
the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond
and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest
of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence
any witness during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date
fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
The learned trial court is directed to fix the sureties after due
application of mind in light of the judgement passed by this
Court in Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.
Home Deptt. (Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2023). The
learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the
applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary
demands of sureties or onerous conditions which are unrelated to
the socioeconomic status of the applicant.
It is further directed that in case the applicant does not cooperate
in the trial or adopts dilatory tactics, the learned trial court shall
record a finding to this effect and cancel the bail without
recourse to this Court.
(Ajay Bhanot,J.)
April 23, 2026
Virendra
Digitally signed by :-
VIRENDRA KUMAR BHARTEEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…