Allahabad High Court

ASIF KHANversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 6 May 2026
Bench: VIVEK VARMA

Holding

The court held that, in the absence of corroborative evidence and with no reasonable apprehension of tampering or trial delay, the applicant is entitled to bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Asif Khan, who was implicated in a criminal case (Crime No. 192 of 2025) based solely on a co-accused's statement, as his name was absent from the FIR. The applicant argued that the statement was unreliable and there was no corroborative evidence linking him to the offences under IPC sections 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 340(2). The State opposed bail but could not refute these submissions. The Court found that the applicant had been in custody for almost three months, there was no risk of evidence tampering, witness intimidation, or trial delay, and therefore bail was appropriate. Consequently, the Court ordered his release on bail subject to personal bond, sureties and standard conditions.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted when the accused is not named in the FIR and is implicated only through an uncorroborated co-accused statement.
Whether there is a reasonable apprehension that the accused might tamper with evidence, intimidate witnesses, or cause trial delay if released on bail.
Whether the period of pre‑trial detention justifies granting bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2)

Subjects

bail
Indian Penal Code
co-accused statement
lack of corroboration
pre-trial detention
witness tampering

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13559 of 2026

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : 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.

2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 192 of 2025, under Sections 318(4),
338, 336(3), 340(2), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali, District Etawah
during the pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not
named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the
present case. The name of the applicant surfaced on the basis of the
statement of named co-accused Nitin Gupta recorded while in police
custody. It is stated that the said statement, insofar as it implicates the
applicant, is unreliable. Neither any amount was transferred from the bank
account of named co-accused nor from the bank account of firm known as
M/s. Aditya Constructions to the bank account of the applicant. The
applicant is not a beneficiary of any illicit transaction. At this stage there is
no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The case of
the applicant is distinguishable from that of other co-accused. Further, after
the arrest of the applicant, he has been implicated in other cases, the details
whereof have been explained in Paragraph- 26 of the affidavit. The applicant
is in jail since 04.02.2026 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the
said liberty.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not
satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.
BAIL No. 13559 of 2026
2

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the
record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the
first information report. The name of the applicant surfaced on the basis of
the statement of named co-accused Nitin Gupta recorded while in police
custody. At this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant
with the offence. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for almost
three months and after submission of the charge-sheet 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- Asif Khan, 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.

(Vivek Varma,J.)
May 7, 2026
SKT/-

Digitally signed by :-
SHIVA KANT TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…