GAURAV vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS Advocate - G.A., ,KRISHNA KUMAR SHARMA — BAIL/4236/2026

Disposed: -- on 19th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UPHC010433062026

Filing Number

BAIL/

Filing Date

21-Jan-2026

Registration No

BAIL/4236/2026

Registration Date

02-Feb-2026

Judge

Vivek Varma

Coram

Vivek Varma

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

APPLICATION ( 401500 )

Sub-Category

U/s 439 Cr.P.C. for bail (major) ( 8 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Misc.

Decision Date

19-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

--

Last updated 29-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GAURAV

    Adv. CHANDRA BHUSHAN PRASAD

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS Advocate - G.A., ,KRISHNA KUMAR SHARMA

  2. 2.PARENT/GUARDIAN OF VICTIM

    Adv. KRISHNA KUMAR SHARMA

  3. 3.CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE

    Adv. KRISHNA KUMAR SHARMA

  4. 4.HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE

    Adv. KRISHNA KUMAR SHARMA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Mar-2026

    Vivek VarmaView PDF

    The Allahabad High Court granted bail to applicant Gaurav in a POCSO Act case, finding that the victim voluntarily left her house and went with him to Delhi with no allegation of forceful sexual assault or corroborative evidence linking him to the offense. The court noted his five-month detention and lack of risk to trial integrity, ordering his release on personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Mar-2026

    —

    Vivek Varma

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 05-Feb-2026

    Dr. Gautam ChowdharyView PDF

  6. 21-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. BAIL/4236/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to applicant Gaurav in a POCSO Act case, finding that the victim voluntarily left her house and went with him to Delhi with no allegation of forceful sexual assault or corroborative evidence linking him to the offense. The court noted his five-month detention and lack of risk to trial integrity, ordering his release on personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case