Allahabad High Court

ALTAFversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 29 September 2026
Bench: VIVEK VARMA

Holding

In the absence of corroborative evidence and given the applicant's vague role and lack of risk, the court held that bail must be granted.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Altaf, accused in a case under Sections 131, 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 105 of the IPC for assault leading to the death of the informant. The informant’s FIR alleged that Altaf and three others, armed with danda, assaulted him, but medical reports showed only minor abrasions and old wounds, and the cause of death was attributed to shock and hemorrhage. The court noted that the applicant was assigned a vague, non‑principal role, with no corroborative evidence linking him to the fatal injury, and that a co‑accused in identical circumstances had already been granted bail. Considering the applicant’s prolonged pre‑trial detention of over a year, the lack of any reasonable apprehension of tampering, intimidation, or trial delay, the court decided to enlarge bail. The order directed the applicant to furnish a personal bond and two sureties, and to comply with conditions of appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and non‑pressurisation of witnesses.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused in the absence of corroborative evidence linking him to the principal offence
Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, or delaying the trial
Whether parity with a co‑accused who was previously granted bail warrants granting bail to the applicant

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 105, 115(2), 131, 351(3), 352

Subjects

bail
pre‑trial detention
Indian Penal Code
corroborative evidence
parity
witness tampering
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10995 of 2026

Altaf
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Tripurari Pal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ravi Shankar Tripathi, G.A.

Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rupak Chaubey, learned
A.G.A. for the State-opposite party as well as Sri Ravi Shankar Tripathi,
learned counsel for the informant. Perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 368 of 2025, under Sections 131,
115(2), 352, 351(3), 105 B.N.S., Police Station Sahaswan, District Budaun
during the pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. The first information report was
lodged by the informant (since deceased), wherein it is alleged that the
applicant along with three accused, all armed with danda, assaulted him. The
informant was initially examined at CHC, Sahaswan, Budaun. The attending
doctor noted the following injuries: "(1). Abrasion (.5x.5) cm. on Rt. side
face 2 cm. below Rt. lower lip. (2). Complain of pain at chest. No mark of
injury. No swelling. Patient also complain of breathlessness. Patient adviced
X-Ray chest. (3) Abrasion (1x.5) cm left side abdomen, approx. 18 cm. below
left nipple. (4). Abrasion (5x2) cm. on left leg at left knee". Subsequently, the
informant died on 05.09.2025. As per the postmortem report, following four
injuries were found: "1. Abrasion of size 0.5 x 0.5 cm present on 16 cm
above Lt. iliac crest. 2. Abrasion of size 0.3 cm x 0.2 cm present on 14 cm
below Rt. nipple. 3. Old semi healed wound of size 05 cm x 03 cm present on
Lt. knee joint. 4. Old semi heald wound of size 04 cm x 03 cm present on Rt.
knee joint". In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death is shock and
heamorrhage due to ante mortem speelnic injury. It is contended that a
BAIL No. 10995 of 2026
2

vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has
not been nominated as the principal offender who caused the fatal injury. At
this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the
offence. Further, identically placed co-accused Shadab has been granted bail
by this Court vide order dated 24.4.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No.127 of 2026. Applicant claims parity. Criminal history of the
applicant has been explained in paragraph-36 of the bail application. The
applicant is in jail since 6.9.2025 and if he is released on bail, he will not
misuse the said liberty.

4. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the
prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions
from the record.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the
record, this Court prima facie finds that a vague and general role has been
assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the
principal offender who caused the fatal injury. At this stage there is no
corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Identically
placed co-accused Shadab has been granted bail by this Court. Moreover, the
applicant has remained confined for more than a year and there is no hope of
early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought
to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either
tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness,
therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion
that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

6. Let the applicant- Altaf, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail
on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to
the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;
(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,
(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

September 30, 2026
Manish Kr

(Vivek Varma,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
MANISH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…