Allahabad High Court

PRINCEversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: YOGESH DUBEY JOINT REGISTRAR JUDICIAL

Holding

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Summary

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Prince, who was charged with offences including rape under the IPC and the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, pointing out deficiencies in the FIR such as the absence of date and time, lack of medical evidence, and the victim’s alleged consent. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences, the victim’s minor age, and alleged threats by the applicant’s elder brother. After reviewing the facts, the court, referencing the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Kapil Wadhawan and Maya Tiwari, emphasized the need to address jail overcrowding and trial pendency. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to strict conditions and verification of sureties. The order directed electronic transmission of the bail order to the jail and compliance with procedural directives from a 2023 Supreme Court writ on bail policy.

Issues considered

Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 BNS for serious offences including rape under the IPC and POCSO Act despite the victim being a minor.
Whether the absence of date, time, and medical evidence in the FIR affects the grant of bail.
Whether the applicant’s prior criminal history and alleged threats by his brother preclude bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
Indian Penal Code — s. 123, 308(2), 351(3), 61(2), 64(2)M
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 3, 4

Subjects

bail
rape
POCSO
IPC
overcrowded jails
Section 483 BNS
victim consent
false implication

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7303 of 2026

Prince
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bindeshwari Prasad Mishra, Birendra
Kaushik, Gyan Chandra Yadav,
Saurabh Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Archana Hans, G.A., Subedar Mishra

Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

1. Heard Sri Birendra Kaushik, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Subedar Mishra, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri B.P. Singh,
learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer
to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 329 of 2025 under Sections 123,
64(2)M, 308(2), 61(2), 351(3) BNS and 3/4 POCSO Act registered at Police
Station Naujheel, District Mathura during pendency of the trial.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case and on perusal of the FIR, it appears
that date and time of the incident is not mentioned. It is next submitted that
on perusal of the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and
183 BNSS, it appears that she was in consensual relationship with the
applicant for the last two years. It is further submitted that age of the victim
has been found to be 16 years as per certificate of High School and she has
refused to undergo medico-legal examination. It is further submitted that no
photograph or video as alleged has been recovered during investigation. It is
also submitted that applicant has criminal history of two cases which has
been duly explained in the memo of application and he has been languishing
in jail since 22.11.2025. It is lastly submitted that in case applicant is granted
bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial
BAIL No. 7303 of 2026
2

proceedings.

4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first
informant opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submit
that elder brother of the applicant used to threaten the victim and her family
members.

5. As per the FIR, applicant along with two other accused persons is said to
have committed rape on the victim, however, date and time of the alleged
incident is not mentioned in the FIR. On perusal of the statements of the
victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, it appears that she was
in consensual relationship with the applicant for the last two years and she
was on talking terms with him. She also stated that applicant gave her some
cold-drink and by consuming the same, she fell unconscious and, thereafter,
applicant committed rape on her and he also recorded video of the said
incident. The victim has been found to be aged about 16 years as per
certificate of High School and she has refused to undergo medico-legal
examination. No photograph or video as alleged has been recovered during
investigation. Applicant has criminal history of two cases which has been
duly explained in the memo of application and he has been languishing in
jail since 22.11.2025.

6. 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.

7. Let the applicant Prince 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:-
BAIL No. 7303 of 2026
3

(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.

8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. 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 29, 2026
Madhurima

Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…