Allahabad High Court
PUSPENDRA ALIAS ARUN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The bail application is allowed.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for Puspendra alias Arun Kumar, who was charged under Sections 115(2), 351(2) of the same Act and Sections 5(M)/6 of the POCSO Act for alleged penetrative sexual assault on a nine‑year‑old boy. The applicant argued that the FIR lacked corroboration, the victim’s statement was unreliable, and there was no spermatozoa found in the medico‑legal report, while also highlighting his clean criminal record and prolonged pre‑trial detention. The State opposed bail, pointing to the prompt FIR, the presence of rectal abrasion, and the seriousness of the offence. After weighing the evidence and the applicant’s circumstances, the Court, without commenting on the merits, found the case fit for bail and ordered release on a personal bond with strict conditions. The order emphasized that it does not prejudice the trial’s outcome and any breach of conditions would lead to bail cancellation.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 BNS for an alleged POCSO offence when medical evidence is inconclusive.
- Whether the victim’s statement can be deemed unreliable for the purpose of bail.
- Whether the presence of rectal abrasion alone justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal record and prolonged pre‑trial detention warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 351(2), 483
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 5(M), 6
Subjects
- bail
- sexual assault
- POCSO
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- medical evidence
- victim testimony
- criminal history
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41271 of 2025
Puspendra Alias Arun Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shiva Kant Dubey, Surya Prakash Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Jyoti Singh
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Shiva Kant Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.P. Singh,
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. 246 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 351(2) BNS and 5(M)/6
POCSO Act registered at Police Station Narkhi, District Firozabad 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 as the allegations made in the FIR do not find
corroboration with the medico-legal report of the victim. It is further submitted that
statement of the victim, aged about nine years, cannot be believed as tutoring cannot
be ruled out. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history and he has
been languishing in jail since 14.8.2025. 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.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
applicant and submits that FIR has been lodged promptly and the medico-legal
examination of the victim was conducted on the same day and abrasion has been
found on his rectal area. Learned AGA submits that notice has been served on the first
informant.
5. As per allegations in the FIR, applicant is said to have been committed penetrative
sexual assault on the victim boy who is aged about nine years, however, as per
medico-legal report, though there is abrasion on his rectal area, no spermatozoa has
been found and there is no other evidence regarding commission of the said offence.
Applicant has no criminal history and he has been languishing in jail since 14.8.2025.
BAIL No. 41271 of 2025
2
6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record
and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for
bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED.
7. Let the applicant Puspendra Alias Arun Kumar involved in the aforesaid case
crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with 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 not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates
fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement
under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any
adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial
court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either
personally or through his counsel.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression
on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in
this order.
May 14, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…