Allahabad High Court
SUMIT SHARMA @ BHOLAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The Court granted bail to the applicant on the ground of parity and satisfaction of bail criteria.
Summary
The applicant, Sumit Sharma @ Bhola, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 459 of 2026) involving offences under Section 109(1) of the BNS and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The State opposed the bail, but the applicant's criminal antecedents were explained and deemed not a bar to bail. The Court noted that an accused cannot be detained solely because of past convictions if the bail criteria are otherwise satisfied. It also observed that a co-accused, Niraj Sharma, had already been released on bail in a similar case, establishing parity. Without expressing any view on the merits, the Court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail and ordered his release on personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the accused despite his criminal antecedents under Section 109(1) of the BNS and the Arms Act provisions
- Whether parity with a similarly situated co-accused who was previously released on bail warrants granting bail
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- criminal antecedents
- parity
- Arms Act
- Section 109
- high court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27187 of 2026
Sumit Sharma @ Bhola
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhanshu Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 141 out of 185)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on
record.
2. Heard Sri Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on
record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.459 of 2026, under Sections
109(1) of BNS and 3/25/27 of Arms Act, Police Station Shikohabad, District
Firozabad, during the pendency of trial.
4. The criminal history assigned to the applicant has been explained.
5. This Court is of the view that if a case for bail is otherwise made out,
an accused cannot be kept incarcerated solely on account of his criminal
antecedents. In the instant case, the criminal history assigned to the
applicant has been properly explained.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions
made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration that similarly placed co-accused person Niraj Sharma has
already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 10.8.2026
passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.26566 of 2026 , and without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie the Court is of
the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail
BAIL No. 27187 of 2026
2
application is allowed on the ground of parity.
7. Let the applicant- Sumit Sharma @ Bhola, be released on bail on
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court
concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he
shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear
before the trial court as required.
8. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 8, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…