Allahabad High Court

JUNAID @ BITTUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: KRISHAN PAHAL

Holding

The bail application is allowed.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Junaid @ Bittu in a criminal case (Crime No. 193 of 2025) involving alleged offences under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed innocence, asserting that the alleged victim, who travelled with him and later married him, consented to the relationship and that there was no conclusive proof of her being a minor. The victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS was taken as evidence of consent. The State and the High Court Legal Service Committee opposed bail but could not refute the applicant’s submissions. After evaluating the facts, the court found a prima facie case for bail and ordered the applicant’s release on personal bond and sureties, subject to standard conditions.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) CrPC and Sections 5,6 POCSO Act given the alleged consent of the victim.
Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS establishes consent sufficient to justify bail.
Whether the alleged minor status of the victim affects the bail decision.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 137(2), 65(1), 87
Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 183
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 5, 6

Subjects

bail
POCSO Act
consent
minor
Criminal Procedure Code
Section 183
victim testimony
criminal trial

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 604 of 2026

Junaid @ Bittu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Aamir Nizam, Rakesh Singh Yadava,
Shabana Nizam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Pramila Tiwari, Dewendra Singh, G.A.,
Satya Srivastava

Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.130 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 17.12.2025, but none is present on behalf of
the informant.

2. Heard Sri Satish Kumar Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rakesh
Singh Yadava, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Pramila Tiwari,
learned counsel for the High Court Legal Service Committee, 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.193 of 2025, under Sections
137(2), 87, 65(1) BNS and Section 5L/6 POCSO Act, Police Station
Saidpur, District Ghazipur, 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 she had travelled with the applicant all the
way from Ghazipur to Delhi, stayed there, and married him. She has
expressed her willingness to stay with the applicant only. As per the school
certificate of Class VII, the victim is stated to be thirteen and a half years
old, but there is no valid document to suggest that she was minor. The
applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 14.08.2025. He
undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.
BAIL No. 604 of 2026
2

5. Learned counsel for the High Court Legal Service Committee and learned
A.G.A. have 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 statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS,
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- Junaid @ Bittu, 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
(Ravi Kant)

Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…