Allahabad High Court
LOKESH @ TAUSIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIVEK VARMA
Holding
The court refused bail, holding that the circumstances do not warrant its grant.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Lokesh @ Tausi, who is charged under IPC sections 354 Ka, 354 Kha, 376 AB and POCSO Act sections 5M/6, 9M/10 for alleged indecent acts with a minor. The applicant claimed false implication and no prior criminal record, while the State opposed bail citing the seriousness of the offences and the victim's consistent testimony recorded under CrPC sections 161 and 164. After reviewing the record, the court found a likelihood of guilt, the gravity of the charges, and the tender age of the victim, concluding that granting bail would not be conducive to a fair trial. Consequently, the bail application was rejected, with a direction to expedite the trial. The order clarified that its observations do not prejudice the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged sexual offences against a minor under IPC and POCSO provisions.
- Whether the nature and gravity of the allegations, the victim's age, and the evidence on record preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 161, 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 354 Ka, 354 Kha, 376 AB
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 5M/6, 9M/10
Subjects
- bail
- sexual offences
- minor victim
- IPC
- POCSO
- high court
- trial expeditious
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44265 of 2024
Lokesh @ Tausi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Farah Zafar, G.A., Jang Bahadur Singh,
Sadaful Islam Jafri
Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.
1. Case called out in the revised list. Learned counsel for the informant is
not present.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shashank Shekhar
Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party, and perused the record.
3. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 124 of 2024, under Sections 354 Ka,
354 Kha, 376 AB I.P.C. and 5M/6, 9M/10 POCSO Act, Police Station
Phalawada, District Meerut during the pendency of the trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is in jail since
23.09.2024 having no criminal history. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will
not misuse the liberty of bail.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the
record, this Court prima facie finds that as per the allegations contained in
the first information report, the applicant is alleged to have acted indecently
with the daughter of the informant. The victim in her statements recorded
under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the prosecution case.
During the course of trial, the victim has remained consistent with the
prosecution version. The victim is of tender age. The offence is grave. There
is likelihood that the applicant committed the offence. At this stage,
BAIL No. 44265 of 2024
2
enlarging the applicant on bail will not be conducive to fair trial.
7. Considering the nature and gravity of accusations, the specific role
assigned to the applicant, age of the victim and the evidence available on
record, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is rejected.
9. It is made clear that the observations made in this order shall have no
bearing on the merits of the case.
10. However, considering the period of incarceration, the trial court is
directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest without
granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.
11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the court concerned for
information forthwith.
September 28, 2026
SKT/- (Vivek Varma,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHIVA KANT TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…