Allahabad High Court
NITESHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail and the bail application is allowed.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Nitesh in Criminal Case No. 95 of 2025, which involved alleged offences under Sections 137(2), 65(1), 87 of the B.N.S. and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed innocence, stating that the victim, a 17‑year‑old schoolgirl, had voluntarily accompanied him and that her statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the CrPC either named him or omitted his name. The court noted that the applicant had no prior criminal record and had been in custody for more than seven months. While the State opposed bail, it did not dispute the factual contentions raised by the applicant’s counsel. After evaluating the victim’s statements, the applicant’s clean record, and the length of pre‑trial detention, the court held that bail was appropriate, granting it subject to standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged offences under the B.N.S. and POCSO Act despite the victim's statements.
- Whether the applicant's lack of prior criminal history and prolonged pre‑trial detention justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 180, 183
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 5, 6
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- POCSO Act
- victim statement
- pre‑trial detention
- no prior record
- court conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41903 of 2025
Nitesh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Madan Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
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 Madan Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajni
Kant Rai, learned AGA for the State.
3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in
Case Crime No. 95 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 65(1), 87) BNS, Section 5/6
POCSO Act, Police Station Chandaus, District Aligarh 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 from the statement of victim recorded under Section 180
BNSS it reflects, she herself had gone along with applicant and even from her school
record she was about 17 years of age.
6. He further submits, in the statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS victim did
not even disclose the name of applicant.
7. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present
matter he is in jail since 08.07.2025 i.e. for last more than seven months.
8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the
argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
10. However, as per school record victim was about 17 years of age but she did not
disclose name of the applicant in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS.
11. Further, however, victim in her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS
BAIL No. 41903 of 2025
2
disclosed the name of applicant but she categorically stated that she herself had gone
along with applicant.
12. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is
in jail since 08.07.2025 i.e. for last more than seven months.
13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in
my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant
bail application is allowed.
15. Let the applicant -Nitesh 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.
16. 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 of the applicant.
17. 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…