Allahabad High Court
BHAIRAV PRASAD PATHAKversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- JAI PRAKASH TIWARI
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail as there is no substantive evidence linking him to the offences and no reasonable apprehension of tampering or trial delay.
Summary
Bhairav Prasad Pathak was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 286 of 2024) alleging offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC. He had been in custody since 23 July 2024, amounting to more than two years of pre‑trial detention. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, that no gift deed was executed, and that there was no credible evidence linking him to the alleged crimes. The State opposed bail, asserting the earlier rejection order was lawful. The High Court observed that the prosecution had presented only vague and general allegations, no substantive evidence, and there was no risk of tampering, witness intimidation or trial delay, especially given the prolonged incarceration. Consequently, the Court granted bail with a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions to appear, not tamper with evidence, and not pressurise witnesses, and directed the trial court to expedite the trial under Section 309 of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the charges and the length of pre‑trial detention.
- Whether there is a likelihood of the applicant tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, or causing further delay if released on bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 309
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- expeditious trial
- IPC offences
- CrPC Section 309
- presumption of innocence
- court discretion
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12929 of 2026
Bhairav Prasad Pathak
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhir Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, as well as learned A.G.A. and
perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 286 of 2024, under Sections 419,
420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station Jhangha, District
Gorakhpur, during the pendency of the trial.
Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the subject case. It is submitted that
applicant was neither executed gift deed in favour of Keshav Pathak nor
received any consideration. It is submitted that in other similar case, the
applicant has also enlarged on bail. At this stage, there is no credible
evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Criminal history of the
applicant has been explained in para 15 of the bail application. Applicant
is in jail since 23.07.2024. Learned counsel for the applicant has further
submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse
liberty of bail and is ready to co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and
submitted that there is no illegality in the bail rejection order.
Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this
Court prima facie finds that a vague and general role has been assigned to
the applicant. At this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the
BAIL No. 12929 of 2026
2
applicant with the offence. Trial is still pending. Further, the applicant has
remained confined for more than two years and there is no hope of early
conclusion of trial, more so when 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, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion
that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Bail Application is
allowed.
Let the applicant-Bhairav Prasad Pathak, involved in the aforesaid
case crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two
sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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;
(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
It is further directed that the trial court shall conclude the trial of the case,
strictly in view of the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C., as expeditiously
as possible, from the date of production of this order, without granting
any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, if there is no legal
impediment.
(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
September 8, 2026
Brijesh
Digitally signed by :-
BRIJESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…