Allahabad High Court
SACHINversusSTATE 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 Sachin, accused under Sections 87, 137(2), 64(1) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act for an alleged offence involving a minor. The applicant claimed innocence, stating the victim was 16 years old and that the incident was a consensual love affair, and highlighted his clean criminal record and eight months already in custody. The State could not refute the factual submissions but opposed bail on the ground of the victim's minority. The Court held that the victim's age alone does not preclude bail, especially given the applicant's lack of prior convictions and the circumstances. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to a personal bond, sureties, and standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused under the POCSO Act when the alleged victim is a minor.
- Whether the alleged consensual nature of the relationship and the victim's age affect the grant of bail.
- Whether the accused's clean criminal record and period of pre‑trial detention justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 137(2), 64(1), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- minor
- consent
- criminal history
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 87 IPC
- Section 137(2) IPC
- Section 64(1) IPC
- Section 3 POCSO
- Section 4 POCSO
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44045 of 2025
Sachin
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Atul Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sheeba Rizvi
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Sri Vijay Bahadur Maurya, learned AGA apprised the Court that notice
has been served to the informant on 09.12.2025. Despite service of notice
none present on behalf of informant.
2. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms.
Sheeba Rizvi, learned counsel for High Court Legal Service and Sri Vijay
Bahadur Maurya, learned AGA for the State.
3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant
on bail in Case Crime No. 0296 of 2025, under Sections 87, 137(2), 64(1)
BNS and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Banna Devi, 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.
He further submits, as per school record the date of birth of victim was
23.06.2009 therefore even on the date of incident she was about 16 years of
age.
5. He further submits, from the statements of victim it reflects, she herself
had gone along with applicant and it is a case of love affair.
6. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the
present matter he is in jail since 15.06.2025 i.e. for last more than eight
months.
7. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for High Court Legal
BAIL No. 44045 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 16 years of age but
from both the statements recorded during during investigation, it reflects, it
is a case of love affair and she had gone along with applicant. In view of this
Court it is not proper to withhold the bail application of the applicant only
considering the fact that victim is below 18 years of age even though she is
about 16 years of age.
10. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present
matter he is in jail since 15.06.2025 i.e. for last more than eight months.
11. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed
above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.
13. Let the applicant - Sachin 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.
14. 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.
15. 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
BAIL No. 44045 of 2025
3
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…