RAMESH vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS — BAIL/4229/2026

Disposed: -- on 19th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UPHC010646372026

Filing Number

BAIL/

Filing Date

30-Jan-2026

Registration No

BAIL/4229/2026

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.RAMESH

    Adv. SHIVA KANT SRIVASTAVA,PRADEEP CHAUHAN,PRADEEP CHAUHAN, ,PRADEEP CHAUHAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

    Adv. ,RAJ NATH BHAKTA,BINOD KUMAR YADAV 1123

  2. 2.FIRST INFORMANT /COMPLAINANT

    Adv. BINOD KUMAR YADAV RAJ NATH BHAKTA

  3. 3.HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICE COMMITTEE

    Adv. BINOD KUMAR YADAV RAJ NATH BHAKTA

  4. 4.CHILD WELFARE COMMITEE

    Adv. BINOD KUMAR YADAV RAJ NATH BHAKTA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Mar-2026

    Vivek VarmaView PDF

    The High Court of Allahabad granted bail to applicant Ramesh in a POCSO Act case, finding the FIR was filed belatedly (6 days after the alleged incident), the victim's statements indicated voluntary conduct and marriage rather than forceful assault, and there was insufficient corroborative evidence linking him to the offense. The court released him on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions requiring court appearance and prohibiting evidence tampering or witness intimidation. 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. 30-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. BAIL/4229/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Allahabad granted bail to applicant Ramesh in a POCSO Act case, finding the FIR was filed belatedly (6 days after the alleged incident), the victim's statements indicated voluntary conduct and marriage rather than forceful assault, and there was insufficient corroborative evidence linking him to the offense. The court released him on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions requiring court appearance and prohibiting evidence tampering or witness intimidation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case