Allahabad High Court
Ajay Singh Alias Chotu vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 30 April, 2026
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC:97922
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14547 of 2026
Ajay Singh Alias Chotu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Rahul Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.26 out of 275)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 17.04.2026, but none is present on behalf of the informant.
2. Heard Sri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.251 of 2025, under Sections 70(2), 115(2), 123, 351(3), 352 BNS, 5g/6 POCSO Act and 3(1)(Daa), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)V, 3(2)Va of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kalyanpur, District- Fatehpur, 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. The FIR was delayed by more than four months, and there is no explanation for the said delay. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. An application under Section 173(4) BNSS was moved after a delay of about one month before the Magistrate concerned, and there is no explanation for the said delay either. It is a clear-cut case of false implication. As initially, the allegations were regarding outraging the modesty and touching the victim inappropriately against four accused persons including the applicant. It is also argued that the accused persons forcibly administered poisonous material to the victim.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the victim was admitted to a hospital and released about four hours later, and zinc phosphide poison was found in her in gastric lavage, but there is nothing on record to suggest that it was the applicant or any of the co-accused persons who forcibly administered the said poison to her. Subsequently, as an afterthought, the victim is stated to have escalated the allegations to gang-rape in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS. The said allegations have been made after legal consultation. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 24.01.2026. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, she has allayed the allegations of rape against the applicant only. As such, his case is distinguishable from that of the other co-accused persons. The victim is 16 years old as per the ossification test report.
7. 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 of about four months in the institution of the FIR and 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.
8. Let the applicant- Ajay Singh Alias Chotu, 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.
9. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.) April 30, 2026 (Ravi Kant)