Mohd. Sharif @ Pappu vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2026)

Mohd. Sharif @ Pappu vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Suspension of sentence application allowed; appellant Mohd. Sharif alias Pappu released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, during pendency of the appeal; entire fine of Rs. 3000/- to be deposited within one month from the date of release before the court below; appeal to be listed in due course.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant, convicted under Sections 363, 376 IPC and Section 4 POCSO Act, should be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal (suspension of sentence application under Section 415(2) BNSS). +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances, the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and the A.G.A., and the record (including that the victim was a consenting party, the appellant was on bail during trial and never misused the liberty of bail, and there was no possibility of the appeal being heard in the near future), the Court held the applicant/appellant entitled to be enlarged on bail, expressly without expressing any opinion on the merits of the appeal.

Ratio / Principle

The appellant Mohd. Sharif alias Pappu was ordered 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, during the pendency of the appeal; on acceptance of the bail bonds the court below is to transmit xerox copies thereof to the High Court.

Key takeaways

Realization of the fine was not stayed; instead, the entire fine is to be deposited by the appellant within one month from the date of his release before the court below.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Jai Prakash Tiwari, J.) allowed the Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application under Section 415(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita and enlarged the appellant Mohd. Sharif @ Pappu on bail during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 2602 of 2025, challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.01.2025 passed by the Special Judge, Exclusive Court (POCSO Act), Maharajganj in Special Sessions Case No. 347 of 2021 (arising out of Case Crime No. 88 of 2021, Sections 363, 376 IPC and Section 4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kolhui, District Maharajganj), whereby he was sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 IPC with a fine of Rs. 3000/-. The Court took into account, among other things, the victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. indicating love and affection and consent, her age of about 17 years 8 months 13 days as per the school register, absence of internal or external injury in the medical report, material contradictions in the statement of PW-3, the victim's refusal of forensic examination, that the appellant was on bail during trial and never misused the liberty, custody of more than one and a half years, and the unlikelihood of an early hearing of the appeal. Bail was granted on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount; the entire fine was directed to be deposited within one month of release; no expression of opinion was made on the merits of the appeal.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2602 of 2025

Mohd. Sharif @ Pappu

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Santosh Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 92

HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.

Order on Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No. 01 of 2025

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

This criminal appeal under Section 415(2) of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita has been preferred with the prayer to allow this application and release the appellant on bail in Special Sessions Case No. 347 of 2021; titled State of U.P. vs. Mohd. Sharif alias Pappu , arising out of Case Crime No. 88 of 2021, under Sections 363, 376 IPC and Section 4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kolhui, Distric Maharajganj, arising out of judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.01.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, Exclusive Court (POCSO Act), Maharajganj, and further prays to stay realization of fine during the pendency of appeal.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the subject case. As per the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she was having love and affection with the applicant and she was consenting party. As per school register, victim was aged about 17 years 8 months 13 days old at the time of alleged incident. It is submitted by the learned counsel that though the victim was medically examined, but as per the medical report, no internal or external injury was found on the person of the victim. There are material contradictions in the statement of PW-3. Further, victim has

CRLA No. 2602 of 2025

2

refused for any kind of forensic examination, which creates serious doubt about the incident. It is next submitted that the learned trial court did not appreciate the evidence on record in proper way but convicted and sentenced the appellant for a maximum period of ten years rigorous imprisonment, under Section 376 IPC, with the fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default of payment, he shall serve one month additional imprisonment. Appellant was on bail during trial and never misused the liberty of bail. Appellant is in jail since 30.01.2025. As per custody certificate appended along with the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State, the accusedappellant has already served the sentence of more than one and half years in custody. Since hearing of appeal is also not likely to be completed in near future, therefore, requested to release the appellant on bail during the pendency of appeal.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant, as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, judgment passed by learned trial court particularly the facts submitted on behalf of the appellant, victim was consenting party, during trial, appellant was on bail and never misused the liberty of bail, and none possibility of hearing of appeal in near future. Resultantly, without meaning any expression of opinion on the merits of the appeal, the applicant/appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Accordingly, the application is allowed.

Let appellant-Mohd. Sharif alias Pappu be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned during pendency of this appeal.

On acceptance of the bail bonds, the court below shall transmit the xerox copies thereof to this Court for being kept on record.

Realization of entire fine shall be deposited by the appellant within one month from the date of his release before the Court below.

Order on Appeal

CRLA No. 2602 of 2025

3

List this appeal in due course.

(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)

February 25, 2026 Brijesh

Digitally signed by :- BRIJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad