Allahabad High Court
RANVEER @ RANAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ranveer @ Rana, who was arrested in connection with the theft of an ATM machine (Criminal Case No. 900 of 2025). The prosecution’s case relied solely on the statements of a co‑accused and the applicant’s own confessional statement, with no material seized from his possession. The applicant’s counsel highlighted that there was no other incriminating evidence and that his three prior criminal cases had been explained in the bail petition. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual submissions. After evaluating the limited evidentiary basis and the applicant’s pending custody since 25‑02‑2026, the Court held that he was entitled to bail, subject to a personal bond, two sureties and standard conditions. The bail was granted without any comment on the merits of the underlying theft case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted when the only evidence against the accused is the co‑accused’s statement and the accused’s own confessional statement.
- Whether the applicant’s prior criminal history precludes the grant of bail.
- Whether the nature of the offences (triable by a Magistrate) affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 112(2), 305(e), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- theft of ATM machine
- confessional statement
- co‑accused statement
- criminal history
- personal bond
- sureties
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14402 of 2026
Ranveer @ Rana
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kuldeep Tripathi, Shiv Shanker Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Shiv Shanker Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay
Bahadur Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondent.
3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in
Case Crime No. 900 of 2025, under Sections 305(e), 112(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3),
340(2), 61(2) of BNS, Police Station Civil Lines, District Moradabad, during
pendency of the trial in the court below.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that FIR of the present case was lodged
against unknown person with regard to theft of a ATM machine and during
investigation applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the basis of
statement of co-accused.
5. He further submitted that admittedly nothing incriminating has been recovered from
the possession of the applicant.
6. He further submitted that in the instant matter except the statement of the co-
accused and confessional statement of the applicant there is no other evidence against
the applicant on record.
7. He further submitted that applicant is having criminal history of three other cases
but his criminal history has been explained in the the instant bail application and he is
in jail in the present matter since 25.2.2026.
8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the
arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
10. However, there is allegation of theft of ATM machine against the applicant but it
BAIL No. 14402 of 2026
2
reflects except the statement of co-accused and confessional statement of applicant
before the police there is no evidence against the applicant on record.
11. Further nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the
applicant.
12. Further, criminal history of three cases of the applicant has been explained in the
the instant bail application and he is in jail in the present matter since 25.2.2026 and
all the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate.
13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above,
in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant
bail application is allowed.
15. Let the applicant-Ranveer @ Rana, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction
of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his
personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise
to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
16. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty
to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
17. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in
by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations
shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
May 6, 2026
Ankita
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ANKITA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…