Allahabad High Court
KARAN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Karan Kumar, accused in Crime No. 928 of 2025 under IPC sections 65(1), 351(3), 61(2), 115(2) and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act for alleged rape of a 13‑year‑old girl. The victim’s first statement under Section 180 of the Evidence Act did not name the applicant, while a later statement under Section 183 named him but did not allege rape, attributing the offence to a co‑accused, Akash. The applicant claimed innocence, asserted that the accusation was false, and highlighted his clean criminal record and that he had been in custody since 19‑Oct‑2025. The State could not refute the factual contentions and opposed bail. Weighing the lack of direct allegation, the applicant’s clean record, and the possibility of false implication, the Court granted bail with standard conditions, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a POCSO rape case where the victim’s statements do not directly implicate the accused.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of criminal history and the possibility of false implication justify bail despite the seriousness of the charges.
Legislation cited
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 180, 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 351(3), 61(2), 65(1)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- rape
- minor
- false implication
- criminal history
- Indian Penal Code
- Indian Evidence Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41860 of 2025
Karan Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pramod Kumar Maurya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vijyeta Gupta
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Notice was issued to the informant on 27.11.2025. Despite service of
notice none present on behalf of informant.
2. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms.
Vijyeta Gupta, learned counsel for High Court Legal Services and Sri
Ghanshyam Mishra, learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant
on bail in Case Crime No. 928 of 2025, under Sections 65(1), 351(3), 61(2),
115(2) BNS and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Gulriha, District
Gorakhpur during pendency of the trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is innocent and on
the basis of false allegation he has been made accused in the present matter.
5. He further submits, even victim did not disclose the name of applicant in
her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS and however she disclosed
his name in her subsequent statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS but
even according to this statement co-accused Akash committed rape upon
her. He further submits, actually applicant is friend of co-accused Akash
therefore subsequently he has been made accused in the present matter as in
the FIR her father had made him accused along with co-accused Akash.
6. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the
present matter he is in jail since 19.10.2025.
7. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for High Court Legal
BAIL No. 41860 of 2025
2
Service opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on
facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the
case.
9. However, as per school record victim appears to be aged about 13 years 6
months old but victim in her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS
did not even disclose the name of applicant. Further, however she disclosed
the name of applicant in her subsequent recorded under Section 183 BNSS
but even in this statement she did not made any allegation of rape against
him and according to her co-accused Akash committed rape upon her.
10. Further, applicant is friend of co-accused Akash therefore the reason of
false implication of the applicant disclosed by the learned counsel for
applicant cannot be ruled out at this stage.
11. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present
matter he is in jail since 19.10.2025.
12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed
above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.
14. Let the applicant - Karan Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid
case on 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 appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless
his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper
with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
15. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be
at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the
BAIL No. 41860 of 2025
3
bail of the applicant.
16. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts
brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the
said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
March 18, 2026
AK Pandey
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…