Ankit vs State of U.P. Though It Principal… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2026)

Ankit vs State of U.P. Though It Principal… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Ankit to 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 conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Ankit is entitled to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 38 of 2026 (Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1), 89, 351(3) BNS; Sections 5J(2)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Bhopa, District Muzaffar Nagar) during the pendency of trial.

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court held that, prima facie, the applicant had made out a case for bail and accordingly allowed the bail application.

Ratio / Principle

There is an inordinate delay of more than 5 months in lodging the FIR.

Key takeaways

The victim appears to be a consenting party, and the allegation that she was ravished while her parents slept in the same room was treated as next to impossible.ratio¶¶13
The incident was reported belatedly, only after the victim aborted the foetus.ratio¶¶13
No valid document proves the victim's minority at the time of the offence, and the Class IV certificate appended carries no evidentiary value in law.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail allowed — Case Crime No. 38 of 2026, Police Station Bhopa, District Muzaffar Nagar, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1), 89, 351(3) of BNS and Sections 5J(2)/6 of POCSO Act — inordinate delay of more than 5 months in lodging the FIR; victim appears to be a consenting party; allegation of occurrence while parents slept in the same room held next to impossible; incident reported belatedly only after abortion of foetus; no valid document proving minority, Class IV certificate carrying no evidentiary value in law; prosecution case lacking prima facie credibility; applicant released on personal bond and two sureties subject to verification, with conditions against tampering with evidence and intimidation of witnesses; breach to entail cancellation; observations not to affect trial on merits (Krishan Pahal, J., May 7, 2026).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14168 of 2026

Ankit

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home)	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Atul Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 65

(Sl. No. 27 out of 265)

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 24.04.2026 but none is present on behalf of the informant.

Heard Sri Atul Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record.

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 38 of 2026, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1), 89, 351(3) of BNS and Sections 5J(2)/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Bhopa, District - Muzaffar Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that there is an inordinate delay of more than 5 months in lodging the FIR. The victim appears to be a consenting party, alleging she was ravished by the applicant while her parents slept in the same room which is next to impossible. She reported the incident belatedly, only after aborting the foetus. No valid document proves her minority at the time of offence and the Class IV certificate appended carries no evidentiary value in law. The prosecution case thus lacks prima facie credibility, warranting bail to the applicant.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie

BAIL No. 14168 of 2026

2

the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

Let the applicant- Ankit, 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.

Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

May 7, 2026 Siddhant

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad