Allahabad High Court

ARJUN THAKURversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 6 May 2026
Bench: VIVEK VARMA

Holding

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Summary

Arjun Thakur applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No.56 of 2026) where he was implicated based on statements of co‑accused. He argued that the allegations were false, there was no independent witness, and the recovered items did not link him to any offence. The State opposed bail but could not rebut these contentions. The Court, after examining the record, found the evidence against the applicant to be prima facie weak, noted his clean criminal record and the lack of any risk of tampering or intimidation, and therefore ordered his release on bail subject to personal bond, sureties and standard conditions. The bail order also provided that any breach would permit the prosecution to seek cancellation.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the charges under sections 318, 111, 317, 338, 340 of the B.N.S. and 66D of the IT Act.
Whether there is a likelihood of the applicant tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, or fleeing if released on bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.
Indian Penal Code — s. 111(6), 317(2), 318(4), 338, 340(2)
Information Technology Act — s. 66D

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
false implication
evidence
Indian Penal Code
IT Act
surety
trial

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14106 of 2026

Arjun Thakur
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anand Vibhor Singh, Karunesh Pratap
Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

1. Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned
A.G.A. for the State-opposite party. Perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No.56 of 2026, under Sections 318(4),
111(6), 317(2), 338, 340(2) B.N.S. and 66D I.T. Act, Police Station-
Bilhaur, District- Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of the trial.

3. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present case. The applicant was nominated in the first
information report pursuant to the information furnished by co-accused Raj
alias Krishna, Sohail and Mohd. Imran alias Shibu. The said statements,
insofar as they implicate the applicant, are unreliable. False recovery of two
mobile phones, two SIMs, two pass-books, an Aadhar card and Rs.1100/-
has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the
alleged recovery. The recovered items do not connect the applicant with any
offence. No amount has been credited in the bank account of the applicant.
The applicant is not a beneficiary of the illicit transaction. The case of the
applicant is distinguishable from that of other co-accused. The applicant is
neither a member of any organized crime syndicate nor he acted on behalf of
such syndicate. The applicant is in jail since 02.03.2026 having no criminal
history and if he is enlarged 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. 14106 of 2026
2

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the
record this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was nominated in the
first information report pursuant to the information furnished by co-accused
Raj alias Krishna, Sohail and Mohd. Imran alias Shibu. There is no
independent witness to the alleged recovery. The recovered items do not
connect the applicant with any offence. Further, the applicant has no
criminal history and remained confined for more than two months and after
submission of the charge-sheet 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.

6. Let the applicant Arjun Thakur, involved in the aforesaid case crime be
released on bail on his 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.

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.

May 7, 2026
Manish Kr (Vivek Varma,J.)

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…