Allahabad High Court
SHIVA GAUTAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that prima facie the applicant is entitled to bail and therefore granted it.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Shiva Gautam, who was charged under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the B.N.S.S. and Sections 5(L) and 6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed innocence, stating that the victim, a 19‑year‑old adult as confirmed by an ossification test, had consented to the alleged acts, a fact recorded in her statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. The State, represented by the informant’s counsel and the A.G.A., opposed bail but could not refute the consent claim. After evaluating the facts, the court found that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail, noting his clean record and willingness to cooperate. Consequently, the court granted bail subject to a personal bond, sureties, and conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses. The order does not prejudice the trial on merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) B.N.S.S. and 5(L)/6 POCSO Act when the alleged victim is a consenting adult.
- Whether the victim's consent, as recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., negates the seriousness of the offences for bail considerations.
- Whether the applicant's lack of prior criminal history and undertaking to cooperate justify bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- consent
- POCSO Act
- victim age
- criminal procedure
- Section 183
- Section 137
- Section 87
- Section 65(1)
- Section 5(L)
- Section 6
- Allahabad High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45759 of 2025
Shiva Gautam
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bhupendra Pal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Sunita Singh, G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.120 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the
informant has been served on 5.1.2026. Learned A.G.A. has stated that the
ossification test of the victim has been conducted and the victim was found
to be 19 years old.
2. Heard Sri Bhupendra Pal, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Sunita
Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.123 of 2025, under Sections
137(2), 87, 65(1) BNS and 5(L)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Jajmau,
District Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded
under Section 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she travelled with the applicant to
several places including Mumbai, but she did not raise any alarm
whatsoever. The victim is major aged about 19 years as per the ossification
test report. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since
6.7.2025. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty
of bail.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have
BAIL No. 45759 of 2025
2
vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the
submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the age of the victim and her statement recorded under Section
183 B.N.S.S., which indicates her consent, and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that
the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
7. Let the applicant- Shiva Gautam, be released on bail on furnishing a
personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned,
subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not
tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the
trial court as required.
8. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 6, 2026
Vikas Verma
Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…