Allahabad High Court
NADEEMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIVEK VARMA
Holding
Bail was denied as the allegations are grave and the prosecution evidence prima facie supports the charge.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Nadeem, accused under Sections 70(2) and 351(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 5G/6 of the POCSO Act for alleged repeated rapes of a minor. The prosecution presented testimony of the informant (PW‑1) and the minor victim (PW‑2), both supporting the charge that the applicant and two others committed the offences and recorded videos to threaten the victim. The applicant argued false implication, lack of prior criminal record, and that he would not misuse bail. The court, after evaluating the seriousness of the allegations and the evidence, found the case prima facie strong and declined to grant bail. The bail application was rejected, with the court directing the trial court to expedite the trial without further adjournments.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused pending trial for offences under Sections 70(2), 351(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 5G, 6 of the POCSO Act
- Whether the gravity of the alleged sexual offences against a minor and the material evidence justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO Act
- sexual assault
- minor victim
- grave allegations
- trial acceleration
- denial of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6575 of 2026
Nadeem
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajesh Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma,
learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party, and Sri Raghuraj Singh,
Advocate holding brief of Sri Vijay Pal, learned counsel for the informant.
2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 255 of 2024, under Sections 70(2),
351(2) B.N.S. and 5G/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Agauta, District
Bulandshahr during the pendency of the trial.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant's daughter alleged
that for the past approximately one and half year the applicant along with
two others had been repeatedly committing rape upon her. It is also alleged
that the accused persons recorded videos of the incidents and by threatening
to make them viral continued to sexually assault her.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the instant case. After investigation, the applicant was
not charge-sheeted and was subsequently summoned by the trial court under
Section 358 B.N.S.S. vide order dated 26.09.2025. The applicant was
arrested on 07.02.2026 and since then he is in jail. The applicant has no
criminal antecedents. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will not
misuse the liberty of bail.
5. Learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have
opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the
BAIL No. 6575 of 2026
2
material on record, this Court prima facie finds that during trial the
informant and the victim were examined as PW-1 and PW-2 respectively.
PW-1 has supported the prosecution version and deposed that the applicant
along with two others committed rape upon the victim. The victim (PW-2),
in her testimony before the trial court, has also alleged that she was
subjected to rape by the applicant and two others. The victim is minor. The
accusations are grave in nature.
7. Considering the nature and gravity of accusations, the specific role
assigned to the applicant and the evidence available on record, this Court is
not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is rejected.
9. It is made clear that the observations made in this order shall have no
bearing on the merits of the case.
10. The trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to expedite the
proceedings of trial and conclude the same at the earliest without granting
any adjournment to either parties.
11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the court concerned for
information forthwith.
(Vivek Varma,J.)
March 18, 2026
SKT/-
Digitally signed by :-
SHIVA KANT TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…