Allahabad High Court
SATISH RAJBHARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Satish Rajbhar in a criminal case (Crime No. 220 of 2026) involving alleged offences under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that the victim’s recorded statement under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS indicated she left her house voluntarily and was in a relationship with him, and that a medical examination showed no injuries, making the charges false. The State opposed bail but could not refute the victim’s statement. The Court, noting the victim’s statement, lack of medical evidence, the nature of the offence, the applicant’s clean record, and the need to de‑congest prisons, relied on recent Supreme Court precedents and granted bail with strict conditions. The order directed verification of identities, bond execution, and electronic communication of the bail order to the jail and trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged sexual offences under the POCSO Act and other statutes, given the victim’s voluntary statement and absence of medical evidence.
- Whether the applicant’s clean criminal record and the principle of de‑congesting prisons justify bail despite the seriousness of the alleged offences.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 137(2), 65(1), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- sexual assault
- victim statement
- medical evidence
- overcrowded prisons
- Supreme Court precedent
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34025 of 2026
Satish Rajbhar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pradeep Kumar, Ram Vilas
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Ram Kumar Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the
record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release
the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.220 of 2026, under Sections-
137(2), 87 & 65 (1) B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police
Station-Gaurabadshahpur, District-Jaunpur, during the pendency of
the trial.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that though in the
FIR allegation has been made to entice away the daughter of first
informant but the victim in her statement recorded u/s 180 BNSS and
183 BNSS has stated that she herself left her house on her own and
she is in relationship with the applicant. Therefore, applicant has
been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that medical
examination of the victim does not show any mark of injury or sexual
assault, therefore, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 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. In
case, he is 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 No. 34025 of 2026
2
bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. Considering the aforesaid submission and taking into account the
statement of the victim recorded u/s 180 BNSS and 183 BNSS
produced by the learned AGA wherein the deceased had stated that
she herself left her house along with the applicant and she was in
relationship with the applicant, coupled with the refusal to conduct the
medical examination 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- Satish Rajbhar, 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.
BAIL No. 34025 of 2026
3
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.
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 Jaunpur 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.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
September 23, 2026
S.C.
Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM CHAURASIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…