Sohna Alias Sohanlal Prajapati vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

Sohna Alias Sohanlal Prajapati vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail application allowed; applicant Sohna Alias Sohanlal Prajapati to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions: no tampering with evidence; mandatory personal presence before the Trial Court at opening of case, framing of charge and recording of statement under Section 313 CrPC/351 BNSS (deliberate absence may be treated as abuse of liberty of bail); breach of conditions to be a ground for cancellation of bail; identity, status and residence proof of applicant and sureties to be verified before bonds accepted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, booked in Case Crime No. 125 of 2024 (Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC; 3/4 POCSO Act; 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act), Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Banda, is entitled to release on bail during the pendency of trial. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances, the submissions of counsel, the delayed FIR and the contradiction between the victim's s.164 CrPC statement and the medical report, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court held that the applicant has made out a case for bail and allowed the bail application.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Key takeaways

Bail is subject to conditions: the applicant shall not tamper with evidence and shall remain personally present before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of statement under Section 313 CrPC/351 BNSS; deliberate absence may be treated as abuse of the liberty of bail; breach of any condition shall be a ground for cancellation of bail, and identity, status and residence proof of applicant and sureties must be verified before bonds are accepted.ratio¶¶20
Observations made in granting bail shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.obiter¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 65) — Justice Krishan Pahal (single judge); order dated 8.5.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:74478. Bail ALLOWED to applicant Sohna alias Sohanlal Prajapati in Case Crime No. 125 of 2024 (Ss. 376, 504, 506 IPC; 3/4 POCSO Act; 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act), Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Banda, during pendency of trial. FIR instituted by the informant alleging rape of his daughter on 26.6.2024 at about 11.00 am. Grounds weighed by the Court: FIR delayed by more than two days without explanation; counsel's submissions that the victim is major (about 19 years per ossification test report) and appears consenting per her Section 164 CrPC statement showing no sign of struggle, with no injury observed, that statement contradicting the medical report; absence of criminal history (undisputed by the learned A.G.A.); applicant in jail since 29.6.2024. The Court expressly declined to opine on the merits. Release ordered on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions: non-tampering with evidence; personal presence before the Trial Court on dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of statement under Section 313 CrPC/351 BNSS (deliberate absence open to being treated as abuse of the liberty of bail); breach of conditions to be a ground for cancellation of bail; identity, status and residence proof of applicant and sureties to be verified before acceptance of bonds; observations made in granting bail not to affect the trial Judge's independent opinion based on witness testimony.