Allahabad High Court

SURAJversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA

Holding

The bail application is allowed.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Suraj, who was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 98 of 2026) involving offences under sections 281, 125A, 125B, 109, 117(2), 191(2), 191(3), 352 and 324(4) of the B.N.S. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, that the FIR named only unknown persons, and that no incriminating material or independent witnesses linked him to the alleged incident. The prosecution could not refute these contentions and the charge‑sheet had already been filed, rendering further custodial interrogation unnecessary. The Court noted the seriousness of the charges and the possibility of witness tampering but, without passing on the merits, found that the applicant posed no flight risk, had no criminal antecedents, and there was insufficient evidence against him. Consequently, the Court granted bail subject to personal bond, sureties and conditions to prevent evidence tampering, intimidation of witnesses, and further criminal activity. The bail order was issued on 6 May 2026.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the charges under the B.N.S.
Whether there is a likelihood of the applicant fleeing, tampering with evidence, or intimidating witnesses
Whether the lack of specific allegations against the applicant in the FIR and absence of incriminating material justify granting bail

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 109, 117(2), 125A, 125B, 191(2), 191(3), 281, 324(4), 352

Subjects

bail
false implication
lack of evidence
witness tampering
criminal procedure
B.N.S.
court conditions

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11672 of 2026

Suraj
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pravesh Kumar Tripathi, Vijendra
Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 68
HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned
AGA for the State-Respondent and perused the record.

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant seeking
enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 98 of 2026, under Sections 281,
125A, 125B, 109, 117(2), 191(2), 191(3), 352, 324(4) of the B.N.S., Police
Station Gulriha, District Gorakhpur.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is
innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case crime number.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the FIR has been
registered against four unknown persons. He submits that in the FIR only
general allegation has been levelled against the unknown accused persons.
He submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and his name surfaced
during the course of investigation in the statement of co-accused. He submits
that no incriminating material has been recovered from the possession of the
applicant. He submits that there is no independent witness of the alleged
incident. He submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed on
30.03.2026, as such the applicant is not required for any custodial
interrogation. In the medical report, injury has been shown upon the head of
the victim, which was caused due to accident. He submits that the informant
and his brother were in drunken condition and they met with an accident and
therefore they received head injury. He submits that no specific role has
been assigned to the applicant in the present case. The applicant is
BAIL No. 11672 of 2026
2

languishing in jail since 10.02.2026. He submits that the applicant has no
criminal antecedent to his credit. He submits that there is no likelihood of his
fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release
on bail. Hence, the bail has been prayed for.

Learned counsel for the AGA has vehemently opposed, but could not dispute
the aforesaid fact raised by learned counsel for the applicant.

Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations,
severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting
evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima-
facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made
out.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

Let the accused-applicant, Suraj, involved in above mentioned case crime
number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two
reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court
concerned, subject to the following conditions:

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and
co-operate in the trial.

4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the
trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by
the court concerned.

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below
will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

May 6, 2026
pks

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…