Allahabad High Court
JITENDRA PRASADversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The bail application is allowed, granting bail with conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for Jitendra Prasad, who is charged with offences under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 109, 352 of the BNS Act and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act. The applicant claimed innocence, highlighted a 16‑month incarceration, and argued that the trial was delayed with only the examination‑in‑chief of the first witness recorded. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the applicant's alleged role in a sharp‑edged‑weapon assault causing grievous injuries to his father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law. The Court, after weighing the seriousness of the charges against the prolonged pre‑trial detention and trial pendency, found the case suitable for bail without commenting on the merits. Accordingly, bail was granted on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and a set of strict conditions, with a warning that breach would lead to cancellation.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in view of the alleged assault causing grievous injuries.
- Whether the prolonged pre‑trial detention and trial delay justify the release of the accused on bail.
- Whether the seriousness of the offences under the BNS Act and the Arms Act precludes bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25, 4
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 351(2), 352, 483
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- BNS Act
- Arms Act
- grievous hurt
- trial pendency
- court conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10678 of 2025
Jitendra Prasad
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rahul Singh, Ranjeet Asthana, Ravi
Prakash Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashutosh Kumar Pandey, G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Ravi Prakassh Singh, learned counsel for the
applicant and Sri B.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State-
respondents and Sri Surendra Kumar Shukla, holding brief of Sri
Ashutosh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant
and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of
applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.
308 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 109, 352 BNS and
4/25 Arms Act, registered at Police Station Chandauli, District
Chandauli, during pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that
applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this
case and he has been languishing in jail since 6.1.2025. It is
further submitted that though the applicant has been assigned
specific role of assault by sharp edged weapon on the two injured,
however, injuries have not been found to be dangerous to life. It is
further submitted that the applicant has been languishing in jail for
the last 16 months and the trial is proceeding at very slow pace
and examination-in-chief of PW-1 has been recorded so far and
the said witness has not turned up before the trial Court on
BAIL No. 10678 of 2025
2
subsequent dates for recording of his cross-examination. It is also
submitted that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the
liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of
heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any
early conclusion of trial.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant and
learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
applicant and it is submitted that the applicant has been assigned
specific role of assault by sharp edged weapon on two injured who
are father-in-law and mother-in-law and they have received
grievous injuries of incised wound on their person.
5. Though the applicant has been assigned specific role of assault
by sharp edged weapon on his father-in-law and mother-in-law
and they have received grievous injuries, however, trial is
proceeding at very slow pace and only examination-in-chief of PW-
1 has been recorded so far and the said witness has not turned up
before the trial Court on subsequent dates for recording of his
cross-examination
6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence
reflected from record and larger manage of Article 32 of the
Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on merits
of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail
application is ALLOWED.
7. Let the applicant- Jitendra Prasad involved in the aforesaid
case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of
Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts
to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
BAIL No. 10678 of 2025
3
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial
court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of
charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of
B.N.S.S.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall
not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the
witnesses are present in the trial court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each
date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.
9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the
purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way
be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial
court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent
conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything
said in this order.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
May 18, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…