Allahabad High Court
SRAWANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The bail application was dismissed; the accused was not released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of an accused charged with offences under IPC Sections 376(3), 504, 506 and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act for alleged rape of an 11‑year‑old deaf‑and‑dumb girl. The applicant argued false implication, lack of physical evidence, and alleged extortion by the informant, seeking release on bail. The State contended that the victim’s disability made the alleged crime especially heinous and that bail would be inappropriate. After hearing both sides, the Court, without commenting on the merits, declined to grant bail, citing the seriousness of the allegations, and ordered the trial to be expedited within a year. The applicant was permitted to file a fresh bail petition if the trial exceeded that period.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a case of alleged rape of a minor with a disability under IPC and POCSO provisions.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged offences and the risk of tampering outweigh the presumption of innocence in granting bail.
- Whether the absence of physical evidence and lack of witness testimony justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Indian Penal Code — s. 376(3), 504, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 5, 6
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- minor
- handicapped victim
- IPC
- POCSO
- criminal procedure
- Section 483 B.N.S.
- serious offence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35456 of 2024
Srawan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kumar Vikrant, Pradeep Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Archana Singh, Dhirendra Kumar
Verma, G.A., Srawan Kumar Swarnkar
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Ajit Srivastava, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Kumar Vikrant,
learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for
opposite party no.3, Sri B.P. Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondents
and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer
to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 67 of 2024 under Sections 376(3),
504, 506 IPC and 5/6 POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Asother,
District Fatehpur during pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has
been falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since
06.5.2024. It is further contended that there is no evidence of commission of
rape/penetrative sexual assault on the victim as no external injury has been
found on her person as well as on her private parts. It is further submitted
that bicycle of the applicant has not been recovered from the place of
occurrence and till date, no witness has been examined by the learned trial
court. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the first
informant came to meet the applicant in jail and demanded Rs.50,000/- from
him in order to get the matter compromised. It is also submitted that the
applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also
been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court,
there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
BAIL No. 35456 of 2024
2
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel appearing on
behalf of opposite party no.3 opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
applicant and submit that victim is a handicapped (deaf and dumb) girl aged
about 11 years (as per radio-logical examination) and she cannot speak,
therefore, her statement could not be recorded under sections 180 or 183
BNSS. It is further submitted that commission of such an offence with a
minor and handicapped victim is very serious and heinous in nature, hence,
the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail.
5. I have heard all sides and perused the record.
6. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have committed penetrative sexual
assault/rape on the victim who is aged about 11 years, as per her radiological
report, and it is submitted that she is handicapped (deaf and dumb) and
cannot speak, therefore, her statement could not be recorded by the learned
trial court till date.
7. Considering the seriousness of allegations and other attending facts and
circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits of
the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the
bail application is dismissed.
8. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present
case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible preferably within a
period of one year.
9. Applicant is at liberty to approach this Court with a fresh bail application
if the trial is not concluded within a period of one year.
May 7, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…