Allahabad High Court
SUMIT NEGIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- VIVEK VARMA
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sumit Negi, who was arrested in connection with offences under Sections 309(4), 352, 351(3) and 308(5) of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant argued that the FIR was lodged more than a month after the alleged incident, creating a fatal delay for the prosecution, and that the matter was essentially civil, involving a suit under Sections 37(2) and 39 of the Specific Relief Act concerning a disputed sale deed. The court noted that the co‑accused, Gajendra Singh Negi, had already been granted bail and that the applicant had been in custody for over three months with no prospect of a speedy trial. It found no material risk that the applicant would tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses. Consequently, the court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to standard conditions. The order directed his release on personal bond and two sureties.
Issues considered
- The delay in lodging the FIR and its impact on the prosecution's case.
- Whether the civil nature of the related dispute and the bail granted to the co‑accused warrant bail for the applicant.
- Whether there is a reasonable apprehension of evidence tampering or witness intimidation if bail is granted.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 308(5), 309(4), 351(3), 352
- Specific Relief Act — s. 37(2), 39
Subjects
- bail
- delay in FIR
- Specific Relief Act
- Indian Penal Code
- civil suit
- evidence tampering
- witness intimidation
- parity in bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14475 of 2026
Sumit Negi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Pathak, Chandra Pratap
Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A.
for the State and perused the record.
2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 352 of 2025, under Sections 309(4),
352, 351(3), 308(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Rawatpur, District- Kanpur
Nagar during pendency of the trial.
3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have taken place on
18.7.2025, whereas the first information report was lodged on 25.8.2025.
The inordinate delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the
prosecution case. The applicant had executed the power of attorney in favour
of co-accused Gajendra Singh Negi. The alleged sale deed was executed by
co-accused Gajendra Singh Negi. The applicant and co-accused Gajendra
Singh Negi have instituted a Civil Suit No. 605 of 2025 (Gajendra Singh
Negi and others vs. M/s Y.S.Y.S. Builders and Developers (P) Ltd. and
another) under Section 37(2) and 39 of Specif Relief Act for injunction and
cancellation of sale deed dated 29.5.2018, pending before the Court of Civil
Judge (Sr. Division) Kanpur Nagar. The case is purely civil in nature. It is
next contended that the co-accused Gajendra Singh Negi has been granted
bail by this Court vide order dated 26.3.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No. 2962 of 2026 (Gajendra Singh Negi vs. State of U.P.). The
applicant claims parity. The criminal history of the applicant has been
BAIL No. 14475 of 2026
2
explained in para 42 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since
2.2.2026. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.
4. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not
satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.
5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this
Court prima facie finds that the inordinate delay in lodging the first
information report is fatal to the prosecution case. The alleged sale deed was
executed by co-accused Gajendra Singh Negi. The applicant and co-accused
Gajendra Singh Negi have instituted a Civil Suit under Section 37(2) and 39
of Specif Relief Act for injunction and cancellation of sale deed dated
29.5.2018. The case is purely civil in nature. The co-accused Gajendra Singh
Negi has been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicant has presently
remained confined for more than three months 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 intimidate the witness, 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, Sumit Negi involved in the aforesaid case be released
on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like
amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions
that:
i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness;
iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.
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
S.S.
Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…