Allahabad High Court
JAVED ALIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
In the absence of medical corroboration and with the victim’s statement indicating consent, the accused is entitled to bail.
Summary
Javed Ali was charged under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the POCSO Act for alleged rape of a 17‑year‑old girl. The victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the Evidence Act suggested consent and she refused a medical examination, resulting in no forensic corroboration. The applicant argued his innocence, lack of prior criminal record, and willingness to cooperate with the trial. The State opposed bail but could not refute the applicant’s submissions. Considering the absence of medical evidence and the victim’s alleged consent, the court found the applicant entitled to bail, subject to a personal bond, sureties, and conditions against tampering or witness intimidation.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a rape case under the IPC and POCSO Act given the alleged consent and lack of medical evidence.
Legislation cited
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 137(2), 351(3), 65(1), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 3/4(2)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- consent
- minor
- POCSO
- lack of medical evidence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34453 of 2025
Javed Ali
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raghavendra Sharan Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No. 175 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice to the
informant has been served on 8.7.2025.
2. Heard Sri Raghavendra Sharan Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant
as well as Sri R.M. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the
material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 557 of 2024, under Sections
65(1), 87, 137(2), 351(3) BNS and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station
Shivpur, District Varanasi, during the pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded
under Section 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she had travelled with the applicant to
several places including Prayagraj and Delhi and did not raise any alarm,
whatsoever, although she has stated that applicant raped her during their
stay. There is no medical corroboration of the incident as the victim has
denied her medical examination. She, by her physical appearance, seems to
be major although her age is 17 years as per her own statement.There is no
valid document to suggest that victim was minor.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no
criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since
BAIL No. 34453 of 2025
2
4.12.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is
released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but could
not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the fact that there is no medical corroboration of the incident
and the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS, whereby she seems
to be consenting party and without expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for
bail. The bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant- Javed Ali who is involved in aforementioned case
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 subject to
verification of sureties, with the condition that he shall not tamper with
evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as
required.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant
shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent
opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
April 23, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…