Ram Pravesh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
- Neutral2026:AHC:105445
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an accused is charged with offences under sections 65(1), 87, 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and sections 5L/6, 5N/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, bail may be granted during the pendency of trial where: (i) the statement of the victim recorded under section 183 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita indicates the victim's consent; (ii) the circumstances show the victim went willingly with the accused and married him; (iii) there is no valid documentary evidence establishing the victim's minority; and (iv) the court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, forms the prima facie view that the accused has made out a case for bail. Bail granted under such circumstances shall be conditional upon the accused furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court after verification, with the conditions that the accused shall not tamper with evidence, shall not intimidate witnesses, and shall appear before the trial court as required. Breach of the conditions of bail shall result in cancellation of bail, and any observations made in the bail order shall not affect the trial on merits.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1. List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 25.4.2026.
2. Heard Sri Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Bharti Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.3 and Sri R.P. Singh, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 517 of 2025, under Sections 65(1), 87, 137(2) BNS and 5L/6, 5N/6 POCSO Act, Police Station AIIMS, District Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS, whereby she seems to be consenting party, as she had gone with the applicant all the way from Gorakhpur to Mumbai and married him; there being no valid document to suggest that the victim is minor 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. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
5. Let the applicant- Ram Pravesh who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to verification of sureties, with the condition that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.
6. Breach of any of the above condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observation herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
May 7, 2026
Shalini
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free