Allahabad High Court
ROBINversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Robin, accused in Crime No. 142 of 2026 under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (sections 64(1) and 115(2)) and the POCSO Act (sections 3 and 4) for alleged rape of the informant's daughter. The applicant argued that the victim’s statement under section 183 of the B.N.S. indicated a consensual meeting, that the medical report showed no injuries, and that he had no prior criminal record, contending he was falsely implicated. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual contentions. The Court, noting the victim’s statement, the medical report, the nature of the offence, the overcrowding of prisons, and recent Supreme Court precedents, held that the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, bail was granted subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and specific conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and further criminal activity.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under the B.N.S. and POCSO provisions pending trial
- Whether the victim’s statement and medical report justify the grant of bail
- Whether the principles laid down in recent Supreme Court judgments on bail apply to the present case
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 183, 64(1)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- sexual offences
- POCSO
- B.N.S.
- victim statement
- medical report
- overcrowded prisons
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34019 of 2026
Robin
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pankaj Sharma, Prashant Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Pankaj Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Bhupendra Pal Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the
record. However, no one appears on behalf of the first informant
despite service of notice.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release
the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 142 of 2026, under Sections-
64(1), 115(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.), 2023 and Sections
3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act,
2012, P.S. Bachhrayun, District Amroha, during the pendency of the
trial.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that in the FIR,
allegation has been made that the daughter of the first informant was
missing in night, when she returned back then she told that she had
gone to take water from hand pump where the applicant met her and
after dragging her in a secluded home, committed rape upon her. It is
further submitted that victim girl in her statement recorded u/s 183
BNSS clearly stated that she herself left the house at 1:00 am on
21.07.2026 to meet the applicant as she was in relationship with the
applicant and present applicant has not committed any wrong with
her. It is further submitted that medical examination report of the
victim does not show any mark of injury or any sign of sexual assault,
applicant has been falsely implicated at the instance of father of the
victim after knowing the relationship of the applicant and victim. It is
further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. It is
further submitted that charge sheet has been filed in the present
case, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation.
The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.07.2026. In case, he is
BAIL No. 34019 of 2026
2
granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate
in the trial proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. Considering the aforesaid submission and taking into account the
statement of victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS, coupled with the medical
examination report of the victim and keeping in view the nature of
offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account
overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the
trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of
the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau
of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 as well as
guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P.
reported in 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail and
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the
opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on
bail. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.
6. Let the applicant- Robin, involved in the aforementioned 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,
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 cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely
without seeking any adjournment.
iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or
commission of any crime after being released on bail.
iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the
bond executed by him.
7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.
8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
BAIL No. 34019 of 2026
3
9. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as
well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
10. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis
of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the
official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned
counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within
15 days.
11. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order
to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System
(BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant.
12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant
through Amroha Jail Superintendent via e-mail or on e-prison portal
and Trial Court via e-mode within 24 hours in compliance of the order
of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In
Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on
31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685 as well as Pila Pahan @
Peela Pahan and others Vs. State of Jharkhand and another, in
Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 169 of 2025, decided on 29.05.2026.
September 23, 2026
S.C.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM CHAURASIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…