Allahabad High Court

HIMANSHUversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 7 September 2026
Bench: AVNISH SAXENA

Holding

The court held that, in view of the minimal injury and absence of proven intent to murder, the accused is entitled to bail.

Summary

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Himanshu, accused in a case (Crime No. 498 of 2026) involving alleged assault on a traffic police constable. The FIR alleged that the accused, while riding a motorcycle, hurled abuses and assaulted the constable, causing a head injury deemed not significant. The applicant, a student with no prior criminal record, argued that there was no overt act indicating intent to murder and that he was cooperating with the investigation. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the alleged offenses under various IPC sections. After evaluating the nature of the injuries, the lack of proven intent, and the applicant's personal circumstances, the court granted bail on personal bond and sureties, referencing recent Supreme Court dicta on bail policy.

Issues considered

Whether the accused is entitled to bail pending trial for offences under Sections 109(1), 110, 132, 3(5), 115(2), 352, 351(2) of the IPC.
Whether the nature and extent of the injury to the police constable justify denial of bail.
Whether the applicant's lack of criminal history and status as a student warrant the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 110, 115(2), 132, 3(5), 351(2), 352

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
Indian Penal Code
assault
traffic police
injury
student applicant
Supreme Court bail jurisprudence

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27530 of 2026

Himanshu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Srivastava, Prashant
Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for accused
applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.

1A. Learned AGA for the State hands up the counter affidavit, the same is
taken on record.

2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant/ accused-
Himanshu to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 498 of 2026, under
Sections 109(1), 110, 132, 3(5), 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, P.S.- Kotwali
City, District- Bijnor, during the pendency of trial.

3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the accused
applicant has been implicated in the FIR dated 29.06.2026 lodged by the
Traffic Police Constable with the allegation that the two accused persons
including the accused/applicant while on motorcycle bearing no. UP20CE
1211 have been intercepted by the traffic police while he was on traffic
duty. The accused started hurling abuses and assaulted the
injured/informant with the intention to kill. The motorcycle is owned by
the accused/applicant. It is the contention of learned counsel that the
applicant is pursuing his competitive examination and he speed up the
motorcyle, the traffic police person on chasing fell on the ground and
suffered injuries. There is no overt act on the part of the
accused/applicant. The medico legal report shows one injury on the head
of the injured, which came out to be 'no significant neuroparenchymal
BAIL No. 27530 of 2026
2

abnormality detected'. Even if the injury and weapon, is taken to
consideration, the same cannot qualify that the accused/applicant has any
intention to commit murder. The applicant has no criminal history. The
accused applicant is languishing in jail since 09.07.2025. The
investigation is continuing and he is cooperating in the investigation. The
accused/applicant is a student and therefore, seeks enlarged on bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. for State and learned counsel for the informant have
opposed the prayer for bail.

5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Considering the nature and number of injuries on the person of injured
and the argument raised by learned counsel, the accused/applicant is
entitled to be released on bail.

7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is
allowed.

8. The accused/applicant 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 court concerned in view of observation made by the
Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in
re [(2024)10SCC 685].

9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and
speedy disposal.

(Avnish Saxena,J.)
September 8, 2026
Abhishek Sri.

Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…