Allahabad High Court
RAJEEV KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The bail application is allowed.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Rajeev Kumar, who was arrested in connection with Crime No. 66 of 2026 involving alleged violations of Sections 309(4) and 317(2) of the same Act and offences under the Arms Act. The applicant claimed innocence, stating that the FIR was lodged against unknown persons and that he had been detained since 10 April 2026. The State opposed bail, citing the recovery of cash, a pistol, and a knife from the accused. After reviewing the record, the court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, found the case suitable for bail and ordered release on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties, subject to strict conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses. The order expressly limited its effect to the bail application and did not prejudice the trial court’s independent assessment of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in view of the alleged offences under Sections 309(4), 317(2) BNS and the Arms Act.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25, 4
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 309, 317, 483
Subjects
- bail
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
- conditions of bail
- presumption of innocence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16773 of 2026
Rajeev Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anees Baig
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Anees Baig, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
Manoj Gautam, learned AGA for the State-respondents and
perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of
applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 66
of 2026, under Sections 309(4), 317(2) BNS and 4/25 Arms Act,
registered at Police Station Alapur, District Budaun, during
pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that
applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this
case and he has been languishing in jail since 10.4.2026. It is
further submitted that the FIR has been lodged against unknown
and during investigation the applicant has been arrested and Rs.
11,300/-, one country made pistol and one knife are said to have
been recovered from applicant. It is also submitted that the
applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of
cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of
trial.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for
BAIL No. 16773 of 2026
2
grant of bail to the applicant.
5. FIR has been lodged against unknown and as per FIR some
unknown persons are said to have looted some cash and mobile
phone of the first informant and the applicant and other co-accused
are said to have been arrested and from their possession Rs.
11,300/-, one country made pistol and one knife are said to have
been recovered.
6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence
reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits
of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail
application is ALLOWED.
7. Let the applicant- Rajeev Kumar involved in the aforesaid case
crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.
50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial
court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of
charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of
B.N.S.S.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall
not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the
witnesses are present in the trial court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each
date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
BAIL No. 16773 of 2026
3
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.
9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the
purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way
be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial
court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent
conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything
said in this order.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
May 18, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…