Allahabad High Court
SHAH ALAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the allegations.
Summary
The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Shah Alam, who was arrested in a case involving alleged rape of a minor under the POCSO Act and several sections of the BNS. The applicant claimed false implication, arguing that the alleged incident occurred before his marriage to the victim and that the victim's age was improperly established using an Aadhaar card without a radiological test. The State contended that the victim was a 13‑year‑old minor who gave birth to a child fathered by the applicant, as confirmed by DNA testing. After reviewing the facts, the court noted the seriousness of the offence but also considered jail overcrowding, pendency of cases, and recent Supreme Court precedents on bail. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to strict conditions, and ordered his release on personal bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a POCSO case involving alleged rape of a minor.
- Whether the victim's age, determined solely on the basis of an Aadhaar card, is sufficient for the charge under POCSO.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the claim of false implication affect the bail decision.
- Whether the seriousness of the offence outweighs considerations of jail overcrowding and trial pendency.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- rape of minor
- age determination
- DNA evidence
- jail overcrowding
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5981 of 2026
Shah Alam
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandra Bhan Yadav, Mahesh
Prasad Yadav, Udai Shankar
Chauhan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s): Babita Saxena, G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri M.P. Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
Shiv Dutt Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and Miss Babita
Saxena, learned counsel for High Court Legal Services Committee.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to
release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 342 of 2025, under
Sections 65(2), 61(2), 352, 351(3) of BNS and Section
5J(ii)/5L/5M/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Kopaganj, District
Mau, during the pendency of the trial.
3. At the very outset, learned AGA submits that notice has been
served on the first informant.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next
submitted that the alleged incident is said to have taken place on
14.2.2025 and the marriage of the applicant and the victim was
solemnized on 1.9.2025 and thereafter the victim gave birth to a
child on 15.10.2025 and after birth of the child, present FIR has
been lodged. It is next submitted that there is no educational
record of the victim regarding her age and her age has been
determined on the basis of her Aadhar Card which is not
admissible document in POCSO cases and no radio-logical
BAIL No. 5981 of 2026
2
examination of the victim has been conducted for her age
determination. It is further submitted that on perusal of the FIR, it
appears that present case relates to matrimonial dispute and DNA
report has been obtained by the State which indicates that the
applicant is the biological father of the child of the victim. It is also
submitted that the applicant has been languishing in jail since
16.11.2025 and he is having no criminal history. 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. and the learned counsel for the High
Court Legal Services Committee have vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail, however, it is submitted that the the victim is a
minor girl aged about 13 years as per her Aadhar Card and she
has been subject to rape by the applicant on 14.2.2025 and the
victim gave birth to a child on 15.10.2025 and the applicant is the
biological father of the child of the victim as per report of DNA
sample.
6. FIR has been lodged after a considerable delay and as per the
allegation in the FIR, the applicant is said to have committed rape
on the victim on 14.2.2025 and thereafter the marriage of the
applicant and the victim was solemnized on 1.9.2025 and the
victim gave birth to a child on 15.10.2025 and FIR has been lodged
on 16.11.2025. There is no educational record of the victim
regarding her age and her age has been determined on the basis
of her Aadhar Card and as per Aadhar Card she is aged about 13
years, however, no radio-logical examination of the victim has
been conducted for her age determination. The applicant has been
languishing in jail since 16.11.2025 and he is having no criminal
history.
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
BAIL No. 5981 of 2026
3
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- Shah Alam involved in the aforementioned
crime be released on bail, on his 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 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.
BAIL No. 5981 of 2026
4
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.
September 23, 2026
Abhishek
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…