Allahabad High Court
RAHULversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Rahul in a criminal case (Crime No. 83 of 2026) involving alleged inducement of a minor under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m) of the CrPC and Sections 51/6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that the victim’s statements indicated a consensual relationship and marriage, that a charge‑sheet had already been filed, and that he had no prior criminal record, having been in custody since 10 July 2026. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the victim’s statements. The Court, noting the overcrowded jails, pendency of cases, and recent Supreme Court and High Court precedents on bail, held that the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, bail was granted subject to a personal bond, two sureties and several conditions, including non‑interference with evidence and cooperation with the trial. The order also directed procedural steps for verification of identity and electronic transmission of the bail order.
Issues considered
- The applicant’s entitlement to bail despite the nature of the alleged offence under the POCSO Act.
- Whether the victim’s consent and the filing of a charge‑sheet negate the need for custodial interrogation.
- The impact of jail overcrowding and case pendency on the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 137(2), 64(2)(m), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 51/6
Subjects
- bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- POCSO Act
- overcrowded prisons
- judicial precedent
- victim consent
- charge sheet
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35195 of 2026
Rahul
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dileep Singh Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Dileep Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Himanshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No 83 of 2026, under
Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m) B.N.S. and 51/6 POCSO Act, Police Station
Walterganj, District Basti.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that though in the FIR,
the allegation has been made against the applicant to entice away the
daughter of first informant. However, the victim, in her statements recorded
under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, has specifically stated that she has left
her house on her own free will and she is in relationship with the applicant.
It was also stated by the victim that she had already married to the applicant
and both are living as husband and wife. It is lastly argued that charge sheet
has been filed by the police, therefore, there is no requirement for custodial
interrogation. The applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in
jail since 10.07.2026. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the
liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for
bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.
5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of
learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence,
evidence, complicity of accused and taking into account overcrowded jails
BAIL No. 35195 of 2026
2
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- Rahul 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.
9. Verification of mobile number as well as Aadhaar Card of the applicant
and sureties should also be conducted by the court concerned.
10. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
downloaded copy of this order 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.
BAIL No. 35195 of 2026
3
11. It is 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
Basti Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal and Trial Court via
e-mode within 24 hours in compliance of the orders 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 in the case of 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.
13. Application, if any, stands disposed of.
October 1, 2026
A.Kr.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
AJAY KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…