Vishal vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 814 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Vishal vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 15 April, 2026

Author: Krishan Pahal

Bench: Krishan Pahal

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC:83203
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27885 of 2025   
 
   Vishal    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State Of U.P. And 3 Others    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Amar Nath Singh, Ram Prakash Sharma, Vivek Singh   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A., Ramesh Chandra Pal   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 65
 
    (Sl. No. 114 out of 311)        
 
 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.          

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Sri Amar Nath Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sachchidanand Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ramesh Chandra Pal, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 416 of 2025, under Sections 64(2)M, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of BNS and Sections 5L/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Kankarkheda, District - Meerut, during the pendency of trial.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS, prima facie, indicates an element of consent, inasmuch as she is stated to have accompanied the applicant to several places and to have maintained a corporeal relationship with him over a period of about three years without raising any alarm. A consensual relationship appears to have been subsequently given a criminal colour by the victim.

5. As per the High School certificate, the age of the victim is about 17 years and 04 months, and thus, she is marginally below the age of majority. However, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sushil Kumar vs. Rakesh Kumar, (2003) 8 SCC 673, wherein it has been observed that, in Indian society, the age of wards is often recorded as lower than their actual age, she may be treated as being of majority age for the purposes of the present consideration. The applicant himself is a 24 years old youth. Furthermore, there is no medical evidence on record to corroborate the alleged incident.

6. 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. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

7. Let the applicant- Vishal, 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.

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

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

April 15, 2026

Siddhant