Allahabad High Court

MOHAMMAD MOHSINversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA

Holding

The court held that bail should be granted to the accused, Mohammad Mohsin, subject to conditions.

Summary

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for Mohammad Mohsin, who is charged with offences under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 411. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, that his name was added to the FIR two years after the alleged incident, that the FIR was lodged with an unexplained delay and that the grounds of his arrest were not communicated, rendering the arrest void. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the possibility of witness tampering. Referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Deepak Kumar Shrivas v. State of Chhattisgarh (2024 INSC 117), the court noted the lack of direct benefit to the applicant and found no substantial risk of flight or evidence tampering. Accordingly, the court granted bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties and conditions of non‑tampering, non‑intimidation of witnesses and regular appearance, ordering the release on May 6 2026.

Issues considered

Whether the delay in filing the FIR and failure to communicate grounds of arrest invalidate the arrest and justify bail
Whether the applicant's alleged involvement in the fraudulent contract warrants denial of bail
Whether there is a risk of the applicant tampering with witnesses or fleeing if released on bail
Whether Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 permits enlargement of bail in the present circumstances

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
Indian Penal Code — s. 411, 420, 467, 468, 471

Subjects

bail
Section 483
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
IPC offences
delay in FIR
false implication
witness tampering
sureties

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13277 of 2026

Mohammad Mohsin
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Afzal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

Heard Mohd. Afzal, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Arimardan
Yadav, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant,
Mohammad Mohsin, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 252
of 2025, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 411 IPC, Police Station
Amariya, District Pilibhit, during the pendency of the trial before the
Court below.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is
innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number
and is languishing in jail since 2.2.2026. Learned counsel for the applicant
submits that applicant was not named in the FIR. During course of
investigation, his name surfaced on record. FIR has been lodged with the
delay of 02 years without any plausible explanation for delay in lodging
the FIR. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per prosecution
case, allegation against the applicant along with co-accused persons have
duped the first informant for securing his job in a government
department. Applicant is not beneficiary of the money in any manner. Not
a single penny relating to the case crime number has been credited into
the bank account of the applicant. The ground of arrest has not been
communicated to the applicant, which is mandatory requirement of law
and as such, the arrest becomes void ab initio. Much emphasis has been
BAIL No. 13277 of 2026
2

drawn by learned counsel for the applicant to the Para 13 of decision of
the Apex Court rendered in case of Deepak Kumar Shrivas and another
versus State of Chattisgarh and others, reported in 2024 INSC 117,
which is as under:-

"13. A reading of the entire material on record clearly reflects that it was
totally an unlawful contract between the parties where money was being
paid for securing a job in the government department(s) or private sector.
Apparently, a suit for recovery could not have been filed for the said
purpose and even if it could be filed, it could be difficult to establish the
same where the payment was entirely in cash. Therefore, the respondent
no.6 found out a better medium to recover the said amount by building
pressure on the appellant and his brother by lodging the FIR. Under the
threat of criminal prosecution, may be the appellant would have tried to
sort out and settle the dispute by shelving out some money."

Charge sheet in this case has been filed on 20.4.2026 and cognizance
thereon has already been taken on 30.4.2026. Further custodial
interrogation of the applicant is no more required. Applicant has 02 cases
of criminal antecedent, which have sufficiently been explained and there
is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with
evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations,
aforesaid law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court, severity of the
punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence,
reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie,
but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

Let the accused-applicant, Mohammad Mohsin, 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:
BAIL No. 13277 of 2026
3

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.

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
May 6, 2026
Ravi Prakash

Digitally signed by :-
RAVI PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…