Allahabad High Court
HAPPY @ HARPREETversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The Court held that bail could not be granted and rejected the applicant's bail application.
Summary
The applicant, accused in Crime No. 367 of 2025 under Sections 109(1), 351(3), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., applied for enlargement of bail during trial. He claimed innocence, stating that no incriminating material was found on him and that the alleged weapon was recovered from a co‑accused. The State opposed bail, highlighting the FIR allegation that the applicant assaulted a sixty‑year‑old victim, supported by a CT‑scan showing serious head injuries and a nasal fracture. After hearing both sides, the Court found the seriousness of the alleged assault sufficient to deny bail. Consequently, the bail application was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail during the trial for offences under Sections 109(1), 351(3), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. involving alleged assault with serious injuries
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109(1), 3(5), 351(3), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- injury
- trial
- presumption of innocence
- court discretion
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10945 of 2026
Happy @ Harpreet
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Shyam Shanker Pandey, Subodh
Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the material on record.
2. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case
Crime No. 367 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 351(3), 352 and 3(5) of
B.N.S., P.S. Bhagatpur, District-Moradabad, is seeking enlargement on
bail during the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case
due to some ulterior motive. He next submitted that general allegation of
assaulting the victim has been made against four persons, including
applicant. He further submitted that no incriminating article or material
has been recovered either from the applicant or on his pointing out. The
recovery of axe has been allegedly shown from the possession of co-
accused Santosh. He lastly submitted that the applicant, who is in jail
since 19.2.2026 and has no criminal antecedents to his discredit is entitled
to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.
4. On the other hand, the learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail and submitted that in the F.I.R. itself it is alleged that the
applicant-accused has assaulted the victim/injured person, who is aged
about sixty years. He further submitted that, according to the CT scan
report, a deep lacerated wound and swelling are visible in the parietal
region, along with a fracture of the nasal bone, hence the applicant is
BAIL No. 10945 of 2026
2
not entitled to be released on bail.
5. After having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record, this Court is not inclined to
enlarge the applicant on bail during the trial, hence this bail application is
rejected.
(Harvir Singh,J.)
April 1, 2026
Faridul
Digitally signed by :-
FAREEDUL HASAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…