loader image

Allahabad High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Shankaracharya Avimukteshwaranand in POCSO Case

Allahabad High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Shankaracharya Avimukteshwaranand in POCSO Case

Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati Jagatguru Shankaracharya Jyotishpeethadheeshwar v. State of U.P, Decided on 25.03.2026

The Allahabad High Court has granted anticipatory bail to Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati and another accused in a case involving allegations under the POCSO Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, noting multiple inconsistencies in the prosecution’s version and surrounding circumstances.

Justice Jitendra Kumar Sinha held that the case presented “special circumstances” justifying direct approach to the High Court for anticipatory bail, particularly as the FIR had been registered pursuant to an order of the Special Judge (POCSO).

On merits, the Court flagged several discrepancies, including delay in lodging the FIR despite alleged prior knowledge of the incident, inconsistencies in the victims’ statements regarding the time and place of occurrence, and material improvements in their versions during investigation. It also noted that the victims had remained in the company of the informant rather than their guardians for a significant period and had even appeared in media interviews, contrary to established norms under POCSO law.

The Court further observed that medical evidence did not conclusively establish sexual assault, with no external injuries found and only a tentative opinion recorded. It also questioned the applicability of the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act at the stage of anticipatory bail, reiterating that such presumption does not arise prior to framing of charges.

Emphasising that these observations were limited to the bail stage, the Court held that a case for grant of anticipatory bail was made out. It accordingly directed that the applicants be released on bail in the event of arrest, subject to conditions including cooperation with investigation, non-interference with evidence, and refraining from media interaction during the pendency of proceedings.

Appearances: 

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sri Prakash, Sr. Advocate, Rajrshi Gupta, Sudhanshu Kumar, Varad Nath.
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

 

PDF Icon

Swami Jagatguru Shankaracharya v. State of UP  Preview PDF