The Allahabad High Court has granted bail in a POCSO case after finding serious discrepancies in the school records relied upon to establish the victim’s age. The Court noted that the school named as the issuer of a transfer certificate denied issuing it and directed the Uttar Pradesh government to frame guidelines for school-issued date-of-birth certificates and the documents required for admission.
The applicant sought bail in Case Crime No. 59 of 2026, registered at Tharvai Police Station in Prayagraj under Sections 65(1), 137(2) and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), along with Section 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act.
Shivam Yadav alias Chhotu, jailed since May 1, 2026, was accused of enticing away the informant’s daughter in Prayagraj. His counsel said she told police and a magistrate that she left home willingly because she was in a relationship with him. An ossification test estimated her age to be between 18 and 20 years.
Her school leaving certificate, however, recorded her date of birth as November 12, 2012. The headmaster told the Court the date came from another school’s transfer certificate, which her parents had given him. That school told police she had never studied there.
The Court held that the school leaving certificate could not be considered because the school named as the issuer of the transfer certificate denied issuing it. In the absence of any other document, the Court observed that the ossification test was the only option available for consideration. Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal further observed:
“This Court came across a number of cases, including the case of the present applicant, where the parents of the victim submitted forged school certificates, like transfer certificates or letters of the Headmaster, showing the age of the victim below 18 years to attract the stringent provisions of the POCSO Act, even in those cases where the victim herself left her house with the alleged accused. These incidents show clear misuse of the POCSO Act just to punish a boy by the parents of the victim girl, who herself left her house being in a romantic relationship.”
The judge also highlighted the need for safeguards in determining age through school records and referred to Section 94(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. The provision prioritises a school date-of-birth certificate or matriculation or equivalent certificate, followed by a birth certificate issued by a municipal authority, corporation or panchayat. An ossification test or another latest medical age-determination test may be considered only in the absence of these documents.
The Court directed the Principal Secretary, Basic Education, Uttar Pradesh, to frame guidelines specifying the format for school-issued date-of-birth certificates and the documents required from parents or guardians at admission. The guidelines should be issued as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months of receiving a certified copy of the order.
Allowing the bail application, the Court directed Shivam Yadav alias Chhotu’s release on a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the concerned court. He must cooperate with the trial, avoid tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, and comply with the bail conditions, failing which his bail may be cancelled. The Court also directed that the order be communicated to the Principal Secretary, Basic Education, Uttar Pradesh, for compliance.
Case Title: Shivam Yadav @ Chhotu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others
Case Number: Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22333 of 2026
