Allahabad High Court
ABHISHEK PALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted as the applicant made out a prima‑facie case, notwithstanding the charges under the POCSO and SC/ST Acts.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by 19‑year‑old Abhishek Pal, who was arrested on charges under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 of the CrPC, Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(V) of the SC/ST Act for an alleged sexual offence involving a 17‑year‑old girl. The applicant contended that the relationship was consensual, citing the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. that she went with him of her own free will and later married him. The State opposed bail but did not refute the applicant’s submissions. The Court examined whether the POCSO Act, intended to protect children, should be applied to a consensual adolescent relationship and emphasized the need to consider the victim’s consent. Finding that the applicant had made out a prima‑facie case for bail, the Court granted bail subject to a personal bond, sureties and standard conditions. The order does not prejudice the trial on merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a case under the POCSO Act when the alleged victim, a minor, claims consensual relationship.
- Whether the provisions of the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act preclude bail in such circumstances.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S. indicating consent is sufficient to justify bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. (Evidence) — s. 183
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 137(2), 64, 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(2)(V)
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- consensual relationship
- minor
- Criminal Procedure Code
- SC/ST Act
- sexual offences
- adolescent consent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45826 of 2025
Abhishek Pal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Krishna Dutt Awasthi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Alka Upadhyay, G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.121 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Learned State Law Officer has informed that the
notice to the informant has been served on 20.12.2025. Supplementary
affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Krishna Dutt Awasthi, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms.
Alka Upadhyay, learned counsel for High Court Legal Service Committee as
well as Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State
and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.65 of 2025, under Sections 137(2),
87, 64 BNS, Section 4 POCSO Act and 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, Police Station
Auraiya, District Auraiya, 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 has stated that she had gone with
the applicant out of her own sweet-will and had married him.
5. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the victim, by
her looks, seems to be major, although she is stated to be 17 years old as per
the school certificate. The applicant himself is a 19 years old youth. The
matter of consensual relationship between two adolescents has been
converted into a criminal case by the informant. The criminal history
BAIL No. 45826 of 2025
2
assigned to the applicant has been explained. He is in jail since 29.1.2025.
He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for High Court Legal Service Committee and
learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application but
could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.
7. The POCSO Act was formulated to protect children under the age of 18
years from sexual exploitation. Nowadays more often than not it has become
a tool for their exploitation. The Act was never meant to criminalise
consensual romantic relationships between adolescents. However, this has to
be seen from the facts and circumstances of each case. The fact of
consensual relationship borne out of love should be of consideration while
granting bail because it would amount to perversity of justice if the
statement of victim was ignored and accused was left to suffer behind jail.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the statement of the victim 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.
9. Let the applicant- Abhishek Pal, 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.
10. 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…