Allahabad High Court
SURENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- JAI PRAKASH TIWARI
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Surendra Kumar, who was arrested in a case (Crime No. 183 of 2026) under Sections 308(5), 308(6) of the IPC and Section 61(2) of the CrPC for alleged extortion. The applicant pleaded innocence, claiming false implication and lack of cogent evidence, and highlighted that co-accused had already been released on bail. The State opposed the bail, but the court, after reviewing the record and the circumstances, found no reason to deny bail. It ordered the applicant’s release on personal bond with two sureties, subject to standard conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses. The court expressly stated that its observations were limited to the bail application and would not affect the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 308(5), 308(6) IPC and Section 61(2) CrPC during pendency of trial
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses
- Whether the applicant satisfies the conditions for bail as per the CrPC
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 61(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 308(5), 308(6)
Subjects
- bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Indian Penal Code
- extortion
- sureties
- evidence tampering
- witness intimidation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27465 of 2026
Surendra Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sanjeev Kumar Singh
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
The present case has been taken up out of turn under the category of
mention cases.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant
and learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record of the
case.
The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on
bail in Case Crime No. 183 of 2026, under Sections 308(5), 308(6), 61(2)
BNS, Police Station- Behat, District- Saharanpur, during pendency of the
trial in the court concerned.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case
due to some ulterior motive. The present case arises of allegation of
extortion of money. It is next submitted that applicant is having no
concern with the allegations levelled against him and he has not
committed any offence as alleged by prosecution. It is next submitted that
apart from the subject FIR, with similar allegations several other FIRs
have also been lodged against the applicant and other co-accused by mine
owners. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant
bail application. No cogent evidence has been collected by the
investigating officer against the applicant. Similarly placed co-accused
Gaurav Mishra, Prince Kumar and Ishvar Pal have been granted bail by
this Court vide orders dated 3.9.2026 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application
No. 24463 of 2026, 28184 of 2026 and 26456 of 2026 respectively. The
applicant is languishing in jail since 08.05.2026. 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.
The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. as
BAIL No. 27465 of 2026
2
well as learned counsel for the informant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record,
evidence and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments
advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view
that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of
the trial.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.
Let applicant, Surendra Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case
on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the
following conditions:-
(i). The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii). The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii). The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed,
unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv). The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of
which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is
suspected.
(v). 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.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the
sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at
liberty to cancel the bail.
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.
(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
September 9, 2026
KK Patel
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHN KANT PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…