Allahabad High Court
AJAY KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ajay Kumar, who was arrested in a case involving alleged robbery and gang rape under several sections of the B.N.S. and the POCSO Act. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, that the victim's age was disputed (16 years 8 months per school certificate versus 19 years per ossification test), and that no incriminating material linked him to the rape, only to recording a video. The prosecution argued that the applicant actively participated and that a video recovered from a co‑accused implicated him. Referring to Supreme Court precedents on bail, the court noted the seriousness of the offence but also the need to address jail overcrowding and trial pendency, and without expressing a view on the merits, held that the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, the bail was granted subject to personal bond, sureties and conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and further criminal activity.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged gang rape and robbery under the B.N.S. and POCSO Act.
- Whether the disputed age of the victim and lack of direct incriminating material affect the bail decision.
- Whether the applicant's alleged role in recording a video constitutes sufficient participation to deny bail.
- Application of Supreme Court bail guidelines in serious offences.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- gang rape
- POCSO
- criminal procedure
- victim age dispute
- evidentiary material
- overcrowded prisons
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41654 of 2025
Ajay Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prashant Mishra, Rakesh Kumar Rathore,
Sanjeev Kumar, Upendra Upadhyay
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Manju Singh, Syed Imran Ibrahim
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Shri Rakesh Kumar Rathore, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Syed
Imran Ibrahim, learned counsel for the first informant and Shri S. D. Shukla, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on
bail in Case Crime No. 283 of 2025, under Sections 70(2), 308(5), 126(2), 351(3),
310(2), 317(3), 115(2), 61(2) of B.N.S. and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station
Kasganj, District Kasganj, during the pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present case though there is no incriminating material against him. It
is further submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS
has not assigned the role of committing gang rape on him and the applicant has been
assigned the role of recording a video of the alleged incident. It is further submitted
that the age of the victim has been found to be 16 years and 8 months as per high
school certificate and the age of the victim has been found to be 19 years as per
ossification test. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history
and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 13.04.2025, in case, he is granted
bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. have
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted by them that the
applicant took active part in the alleged incident and he is said to have recorded a
video of the alleged incident and the said video has been recovered from the mobile
phone of the co-accused Rinku. It is further submitted by them that the victim is a
minor girl aged about 16 years and 8 months as per certificate of high school and the
age of the victim has been found to be 19 years as per ossification test and the
certificate of high school shall prevail over the ossification test.
5. As per first information report, the applicant and the co-accused persons robbed the
BAIL No. 41654 of 2025
2
victim and one Avinash of some cash and jewellery and all of them are also said to
have committed gang rape on the victim and the victim in her statement recorded
under Section 183 BNSS has not assigned the role of committing gang rape on the
victim and the applicant has been assigned the role of recording a video of the alleged
incident. It is further submitted that the age of the victim has been found to be 16
years and 8 months as per high school certificate and the age of the victim has been
found to be 19 years as per ossification test and no injuries have been found on her
external parts. It is further submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of
one case subsequent to the present case under the Gangsters Act has been lodged
against the applicant and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 13.04.2025.
6. 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 the accused and taking into account overcrowded jails 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.
7. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED.
8. Let the applicant- Ajay Kumar 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.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the
court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Verification of mobile number and
BAIL No. 41654 of 2025
3
Aadhaar card of the applicant as well as sureties should be verified by the court
concerned.
11. It is further 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 Jail
Superintendent, Kasganj via e-mail or e-prison portal within 24 hours in compliance
of the order 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.
September 8, 2026
RKM
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…