Allahabad High Court
PRAMOD PASWANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIVEK VARMA
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered the bail application of Pramod Paswan, who was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 137(2) and 64(2)(m) of the B.N.S. and Sections 5L/6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that the FIR was lodged belatedly, the victim's age was incorrectly recorded, and the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S. were materially inconsistent, leaving no corroborative evidence linking him to the alleged offence. The State opposed bail but could not refute these points. The Court observed that the delay in filing the FIR, the inconsistencies in the victim’s statements, the absence of any allegation of forceful assault, and the applicant’s clean record collectively weakened the prosecution’s case. Consequently, the Court held that there was no reasonable apprehension of tampering, intimidation of witnesses, or trial delay, and ordered the applicant to be released on bail subject to standard conditions. The bail order required a personal bond and two sureties, with conditions to appear before the trial court, not tamper with evidence, and not pressurize witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and inconsistencies in the victim's statements warrant granting bail to the accused.
- Whether the accused poses a risk of tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, or delaying the trial.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- delay in FIR
- inconsistent statements
- POCSO Act
- no prior criminal record
- prima facie case
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34189 of 2026
Pramod Paswan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Surendra Mohan Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.
1. Sri Manoj Gautam, learned A.G.A. submits that the notice of the present
application has been served upon the informant/opposite party no.2 and
C.W.C./opposite party no.3 on 8.9.2026. The receiving endorsements
produced by learned A.G.A. are taken on record. However, no one appears
on behalf of the said opposite parties nor any counter affidavit has been filed
on their behalf.
2. Heard counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused
the material available on record.
3. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 102 of 2026, under Sections 137(2),
64(2)(m) B.N.S. and Section 5L/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Bansi,
District- Siddharth Nagar, during the pendency of trial.
4. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on
6.6.2026, whereas the first information report was lodged on 17.6.2026. The
delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution
case. The victim is a major. The age of the victim was incorrectly got
registered in the school records by the victim's parents to give her advantage
in life. There is no lawful basis for the age related entry of the victim in the
school records. As per the report of the medical board dated 23.6.2026, the
victim was found aged about 19 years. It is next contended that the victim in
her statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. stated that she had
voluntarily left her house as her mother slapped her and went to Bansi, Basti
BAIL No. 34189 of 2026
2
and thereafter Dehradun. In the said statement there is no allegation against
the applicant. However, the victim in her statement recorded under Section
183 B.N.S.S. stated an entirely different version. She stated that she had
voluntarily left her house and accompanied the applicant to Dehradun,
solemnized marriage and established relations with him voluntarily. There is
no allegation of any forceful assault against the applicant. It is contended
that the material inconsistencies between the statements of the victim
recorded under Section 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. discredit the prosecution case
at this stage. There is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the
offence. The applicant is in jail since 30.6.2026 having no criminal
antecedents and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said
liberty.
5. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not
satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.
6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this
Court prima facie finds that the first information report has been lodged
belatedly. As per the report of the medical board dated 23.6.2026, the victim
was found aged about 19 years. There are material inconsistencies between
the statements of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. and 183
B.N.S.S. There is no allegation of any forceful assault against the applicant.
At this stage, there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the
offence. Moreover, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has
remained confined for more than three months and after submission of the
charge sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no
reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the
applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay
the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the
case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
7. Let the applicant Pramod Paswan, involved in the aforesaid case be
released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the
conditions that he:
(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;
(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,
BAIL No. 34189 of 2026
3
(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
October 1, 2026
Manish Kr
(Vivek Varma,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MANISH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…