ASHISH vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS Advocate - G.A. — BAIL/12290/2026

Disposed: -- on 20th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UPHC011959462026

Filing Number

BAIL/

Filing Date

01-Apr-2026

Registration No

BAIL/12290/2026

Registration Date

07-Apr-2026

Judge

Krishan Pahal

Coram

Krishan Pahal

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

20-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

--

Last updated 24-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ASHISH

    Adv. NEERAJ CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA,JAGADEESH PRASAD CHAURASIYA,JAGADEESH PRASAD CHAURASIYA, ,JAGADEESH PRASAD CHAURASIYA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS Advocate - G.A.

  2. 2.THE FIRST INFORMANT / VICTIM

  3. 3.CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE

  4. 4.HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICE COMMITTEE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 20-Apr-2026

    Krishan PahalView PDF

    The High Court of Allahabad granted bail to Ashish in a POCSO Act case involving alleged sexual misconduct with a consenting victim who bore his child. The court found the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail, considering he had no criminal history, was willing to support the mother-daughter duo, and the FIR was delayed without explanation. Bail was granted on conditions including furnishing sureties, depositing Rs. 1 lakh for the victim's daughter within six months, and non-tampering with evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 20-Apr-2026

    —

    Krishan Pahal

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    Krishan PahalView PDF

  5. 01-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. BAIL/12290/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Allahabad granted bail to Ashish in a POCSO Act case involving alleged sexual misconduct with a consenting victim who bore his child. The court found the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail, considering he had no criminal history, was willing to support the mother-daughter duo, and the FIR was delayed without explanation. Bail was granted on conditions including furnishing sureties, depositing Rs. 1 lakh for the victim's daughter within six months, and non-tampering with evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case