Disposed

Rahul v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Oct 2025BAIL/35196/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application involving alleged victim's age; no ossification test had been conducted. Court directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate to have the victim's ossification test done by a CMO board within three weeks and to submit the report in sealed cover before the next listing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to conduct ossification test of the victim and submit report in sealed cover by next listing.

Rahul vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35196 of 2025

¶2

Rahul			.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Anurag Kumar	Shukla,	Tiwari Ajay
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 65

¶3

HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

¶4

Sri Dileep Kumar Shukla, learned counsel has filed his power on behalf of the first informant of the case today in the Court, is taken on record.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

After arguing the matter at length, when this Court made query about the age of the victim as per ossification test, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that till date no ossification test has been conducted.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. could not dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

In view of above, this Court directs the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate to get the ossification test of the victim of Case Crime No. 148 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) I.P.C. and Section 3/4 (2) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Ekdil, District Etawah, be conducted, if not yet conducted, by the Board of the Chief Medical Officer concerned within a three weeks days from today. After the said test or has already been conducted, the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate is directed to submit the ossification report before this Court in a sealed cover by the next date of listing.

¶9

The Registrar (Compliance) is directed to communicate the order passed by this Court to the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate within 48

¶10

BAIL No. 35196 of 2025

¶11

¶12

hours.

¶13

Let a copy of this order be placed before the Registrar (Compliance) as well as learned A.G.A. for necessary compliance.

¶14

List on 26.11.2025 in top ten cases.

¶15

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

¶16

November 12, 2025 S.Ali

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Salman vs State of U.P.

Vedprakas vs State of U.P.

Jagdish Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Karan vs State of U.P.

Antu vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rohit Kashyap vs State of U.P. and 3 Others