Allahabad High Court
VIKASversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Vikas, accused in a case under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1), 61(2) of the CrPC and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed false implication, citing the victim’s statement that she left home voluntarily and entered into a matrimonial alliance, and highlighted inconsistencies in her date of birth records and her refusal to undergo a medico‑legal examination. The State opposed bail but did not dispute these facts. Relying on the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI, Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P., and the policy on bail to address jail overcrowding and case pendency, the Court, without expressing a view on the merits, granted bail with standard conditions. The order directed verification of identities, issuance of a bail bond, and electronic transmission of the release order to the jail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under the CrPC and POCSO provisions despite the nature of the alleged offence.
- Whether the victim’s voluntary statements and lack of age verification affect the bail decision.
- Whether the applicant’s criminal history and the circumstances of jail overcrowding justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 137(2), 61(2), 65(1), 87
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 5, 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- false implication
- victim statement
- age determination
- overcrowded jails
- trial pendency
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5109 of 2026
Vikas
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandra Prakash Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Dhirendra Kumar Verma, G.A., Renu
Swarnkar
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Chandra Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and
Sri Shiv Dutt Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. Name of Sri Dhirendra Kumar Verma and Miss Renu Swarnkar,
learned counsel appear as counsel for the first informant but they are not
present. On the last occasion when the case was taken up, they were not
present and the matter was directed to be listed peremptorily.
3. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 376 of 2025, under Sections 137(2),
87, 65(1), 61(2) BNS and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station
Khajani, District Gorakhpur, during the pendency of the trial.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and the victim in
her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has stated that
she had left her home on her free will and she had entered into
matrimonial alliance with the applicant with her free consent. It is further
submitted that there are two records regarding date of birth of the victim
and as per record of one school her date of birth is 3.8.2008 whereas as
per leaving school certificate of second school her date of birth is
1.2.2010. It is further submitted that the victim has refused to undergo
medico-legal examination. It is also submitted that the applicant has been
languishing in jail since 7.11.2025 and he is having one criminal history
BAIL No. 5109 of 2026
2
which has been duly explained. It is lastly submitted that in case the
applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would
cooperate in the trial proceedings.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail
but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
6. As per the allegation in the FIR, the applicant is said to have enticed
away the daughter of the first informant, however, the victim has been
recovered and the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 180
and 183 BNSS has stated that she had left her home on her free will and
she had entered into matrimonial alliance with the applicant with her free
consent. There are two records regarding date of birth of the victim and as
per record of one school her date of birth is 3.8.2008 whereas as per
leaving school certificate of second school her date of birth is 1.2.2010,
however, there is no High School certificate or the certificate of school
first attended and no radio-logical examination of the victim has been
conducted for her age determination. The victim has refused to undergo
medico-legal examination. The applicant has been languishing in jail
since 7.11.2025 and he is having one criminal history which has been
duly explained.
7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions
of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of
offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account
overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial
courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex
Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation
reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 as well as guideline of this Court
in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC
Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is
entitled to be enlarged on bail.
8. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED.
9. Let the applicant- Vikas involved in the aforementioned crime be
released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each
BAIL No. 5109 of 2026
3
in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the
following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police
officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely
without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or
commission of any crime after being released on bail.
(iv) The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the
bond executed by him.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground
for cancellation of bail.
11. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as well
as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
12. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to
the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to
ensure early release of the applicant.
13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal within 24
hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4
of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
September 18, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…