Nasir vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 818 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Nasir 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:82723
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24177 of 2025   
 
   Nasir    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State Of U.P. And 3 Others    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Ananya Upadhyay, Kalpana Singh, Nishtha Tripathi, Rakesh Chandra Upadhyay   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A., Kushagra Srivastava, Shahrukh   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 65
 
(Sr. No.148 out of 311)   
 
 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.         

1. List has been revised. Second supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

2. Heard Ms. Kalpana Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shahrukh, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Yogesh Mishra, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.19 of 2025, under Sections 65(2), 75(2) of BNS and Sections 5(m)/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Masoorie, District- Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is true that the victim is minor, aged about 8 years as per ossification test report; however, it is a clear-cut case of false implication, as the FIR is delayed by about three days and there is no explanation for the said delay. As per medical examination report, there is no injury on the vital parts of the victim?s body. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. The trial is moving at a snail?s pace. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 22.01.2025. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.

5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in the institution of the FIR and the fact that there is no medical corroboration of the incident, 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.

7. Let the applicant- Nasir, 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

(Ravi Kant)