Allahabad High Court
ABRARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
On a prima facie basis, the applicant is entitled to bail despite the allegations under the POCSO Act.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Abrar, a 19‑year‑old accused in a criminal case (Crime No.212 of 2025) involving alleged sexual offences under the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed innocence, asserting that the relationship with the 16‑year‑old victim was consensual and that the FIR was defective for lacking date and time of the alleged offence. The prosecution and the learned Additional Government Advocate opposed bail, emphasizing the victim’s minority, her pregnancy at the time of recovery, and alleged termination of the pregnancy by the informant. After evaluating the material, the court held that, on a prima facie basis, the applicant had made out a case for bail despite the serious nature of the allegations. Consequently, the court granted bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses, with the usual warning that breach would lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused under the POCSO Act when the alleged victim is a minor but claims a consensual relationship.
- Whether the delay and deficiencies in the FIR, such as the absence of date and time of the offence, justify granting bail.
- Whether the fact of pregnancy and its alleged termination affect the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 351(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 351(2), 64(2)(M,I)
- POCSO Act — s. 3/4, 5J(2), 5L/6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- minor
- consensual relationship
- pregnancy
- FIR delay
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38637 of 2025
Abrar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Syed Shahnawaz Shah
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Meena Mishra, Mohammad Tahir
Kurashi, Mohd Shamim Khan
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.116 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Compliance affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. and
counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the informant are taken on
record. Learned counsel for the applicant does not propose to file any
rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the informant.
2. Heard Sri Syed Shahnawaz Shah, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Mohammad Tahir Kurashi, learned counsel for the informant, Ms. Meena
Mishra, learned counsel for High Court Legal Service Committee as well as
Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the
material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.212 of 2025, under Sections
64(2)(M,I), 351(2) BNS and 3/4, 5J(2), 5L/6 POCSO Act, Police Station
Sarsawa, District Saharanpur, 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 liked the applicant as per her statement recorded under section 183
BNSS. She has stated that she was impregnated by the applicant and she felt
pain on her vital parts, but the applicant is stated to have subsequently
refused to marry her as his mother suspected her fidelity. As such, it is a
clear cut case of false implication.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the applicant
BAIL No. 38637 of 2025
2
himself is a youth, aged about 19 years old. A matter of consensual
relationship between two adolescents have been converted into a criminal
case by the informant. The victim, by her looks, seems to be major, although
she is stated to be 16 years old. There is no valid document to suggest that
she is minor. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since
23.6.2025. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the
liberty of bail.
6. Learned counsels for opposite party have vehemently opposed the bail
application on the ground that victim is 16 years old and she was found
pregnant at the time of recovery. Learned AGA has also opposed the bail
application and has stated that the said pregnancy has been terminated at the
behest of the informant.
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 FIR is delayed as no date and time of offence is
mentioned in it coupled by the fact that victim seems to be a consenting
party, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-
facie 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- Abrar, be released on bail on furnishing a personal
bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to
verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not tamper with
evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as
required.
9. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 6, 2026
Vikas Verma
Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…