Rahul Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2026)

Rahul Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Rahul 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 not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and to appear before the trial court as required.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Rahul is entitled to bail in Case Crime No. 177 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Bisrakh, District Gautam Budh Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances, submissions of counsel, the evidence on record and the victim's statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S., and without expressing any opinion on merits, the Court was prima facie of the view that the applicant made out a case for bail; the bail application was allowed.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant Rahul was directed 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.

Key takeaways

Breach of any bail condition shall entail cancellation of bail, and the observations made in the judgment shall not affect the trial on merits.obiter¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — Offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 5(L)/6 POCSO Act, PS Bisrakh, Gautam Budh Nagar (Case Crime No. 177 of 2024) — Victim, in her statement under Section 183 BNSS, stated herself to be 19 years old, claimed marriage with the applicant and stay at his house for over a year, and professed unawareness of the FIR by her parents — Applicant has no criminal history and was in jail since 10.06.2025 — State Law Officer opposed but could not dispute counsel's submissions — Held, prima facie a case for bail was made out; without expressing any opinion on merits, bail allowed on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses and appearance before the trial court; breach to entail cancellation; observations not to affect trial on merits.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30765 of 2025

Rahul

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) :	Rakesh Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :	G.A.

Court No. - 65

(Sr. No.147 out of 259)

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 26.08.2025, but none is present on behalf of the informant.

Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.177 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act, Police StationBisrakh, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim has stated herself to be 19 years old in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS and has further stated that she had married the applicant and stayed in his house for more than one year. She has stated that she was unaware of the FIR instituted by her parents. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 10.06.2025. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by

BAIL No. 30765 of 2025

2

learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

Let the applicant- Rahul , 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.)

April 23, 2026

(Ravi Kant)

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad