Allahabad High Court

MAHENDRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 26 April 2026
Bench: ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA

Holding

The Court granted bail to the accused, Mahendra, subject to conditions.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Mahendra, accused in a criminal case (Crime No. 307 of 2025) involving offences under Sections 352, 351(3), 338, 318(4) and 336(3) of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant's counsel argued that the FIR was essentially a civil dispute, that Mahendra was merely a marginal witness to a gift deed, and that no credible evidence linked him to the offences; he also highlighted the pending civil injunction suit and the applicant's lack of flight risk. The State opposed the bail but could not refute the factual contentions. Weighing the nature of the accusations, the severity of potential punishment, and the risk of evidence tampering, the Court found a prima facie case for bail without commenting on the merits. Consequently, the Court granted bail subject to a personal bond, sureties, and conditions prohibiting tampering, criminal activity, intimidation of witnesses, and mandating regular court appearances.

Issues considered

Whether the accused is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offences alleged.
Whether there is a likelihood of the accused tampering with evidence or fleeing from justice.
Whether the FIR constitutes a criminal case or is merely a civil dispute involving the applicant as a witness.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 318(4), 336(3), 338, 351(3), 352

Subjects

bail
Indian Penal Code
criminal procedure
false implication
evidence tampering
civil dispute
witness intimidation

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12756 of 2026

Mahendra
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Puneet Bhadauria
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sanjay Mishra

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

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh 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. 307 of 2025, under Sections 352,
351(3), 338, 318(4), 336(3) of the B.N.S., Police Station Bakewar, District
Etawah.

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 dispute as narrated
in the FIR appears to be purely civil in nature but the informant has given it
a criminal colour only to harass the applicant and other co-accused. He
submits that the applicant is only the marginal witness of the alleged gift
deed. He submits that no credible evidence has been collected by the
Investigating Officer to connect him in the present case. He submits that
apart from the aforesaid criminal case the informant has also filed an
Injunction Suit before the Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Etawah, which is still
pending. He submits that the applicant is not the beneficiary of the alleged
sale deed but the informant has dragged him in the present case with some
ulterior motive. He submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been
filed as such the applicant is not required for any custodial interrogation. The
applicant is languishing in jail since 17.03.2026. He submits that the
applicant has criminal antecedent of one case to his credit which has been
BAIL No. 12756 of 2026
2

explained in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. 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, Mahendra, 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.

April 27, 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…