The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to Amarjeet Pandey, accused under sections 137(2), 61(2), 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and sections 3/4(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, in Case Crime No. 197 of 2024, registered at Police Station Gadwar, District Ballia. The Court underscored serious systemic failures in age verification and medical infrastructure while passing the order.
Background of the Case
The FIR was lodged by the father of a 16-year-old girl, who alleged that his daughter went missing after leaving for college on September 10, 2024, and that she was enticed away by Amarjeet Pandey in collusion with a co-accused.
Applicant’s Submissions
Counsel for the applicant argued that Amarjeet Pandey had been falsely implicated. The delay of four days in filing the FIR was pointed out, with no explanation provided for the delay. It was also submitted that the victim, in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., had admitted to being in love with the applicant and voluntarily accompanying him to Gujarat on the promise of marriage. According to her, she was 18 years old and left her house after being scolded by her parents (statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S.). There was no medical evidence of injury or coercion, and the applicant had no criminal history.
State’s Response
The State opposed the bail application but did not dispute the absence of any prior criminal history of the applicant.
Court’s Analysis
Justice Krishan Pahal, citing Niranjan Singh v. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote (AIR 1980 SC 785), refrained from making detailed observations on evidence to avoid prejudicing the trial. The Court reiterated established principles from Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022 INSC 690) and Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement (2024 INSC 595), emphasizing that “bail is a rule and jail is an exception.”
The Court observed:
“A person’s right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because the person is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt.”
It noted that the applicant had no criminal record, and the victim identified herself as 18 years old and a consenting party. The victim had traveled to Gujarat and stayed there without raising any alarm, and there was no evidence of physical harm.
Issues with Ossification Test and Systemic Failures
Despite directions issued on February 10, 2025, for conducting the ossification test, the same could not be completed due to various administrative lapses. The victim was taken for an X-ray, but the Chief Medical Officer (C.M.O.) declined to issue a report due to her non-appearance. It was also informed that the victim was in Kolkata with her paternal aunt and later said to be living in Himachal Pradesh.
The Court expressed dismay at the authorities’ conduct:
“The red tape approach is but evident from the attitude of the authorities at large, as such, with a heavy heart, this Court has no other option but to dispose of the instant bail application without the said ossification test report.”
Justice Pahal highlighted broader systemic issues:
- Fudging of Date of Birth by Litigants – Manipulations to gain juvenile status undermine the justice system.
- Failure of Police in Age Verification – Non-compliance with Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, in the absence of documents.
- Healthcare Infrastructure Deficiency – Absence of a radiologist in Ballia district prevents timely ossification tests.
The Court recommended:
- Strict adherence to Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act by the police.
- Immediate appointment of a radiologist in Ballia.
Court’s Decision
The bail application was allowed. Amarjeet Pandey was ordered to be released on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions including:
- Not tampering with evidence.
- Mandatory presence during key trial dates.
- Risk of bail cancellation upon violation of conditions.
A copy of the order was directed to be sent to the Principal Secretary, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Uttar Pradesh.
