Allahabad High Court

RAHUL GUPTA @ NITISH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 10 September 2026
Bench: VIVEK VARMA

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Rahul Gupta (alias Nitish Kumar) in a case involving alleged assault and homicide under Sections 115(2), 351(3), 352 and 105 of the IPC. The applicant claimed false implication, noting a delayed FIR, vague allegations, and lack of clarity about his role, while also having no prior criminal record and having been in custody for over two months. The prosecution opposed bail but could not rebut the applicant's contentions. The court observed that the belated FIR and lack of specific evidence against the applicant weakened the prosecution's case and that there was no reasonable apprehension of evidence tampering or witness intimidation. Consequently, the court ordered the applicant's release on bail subject to a personal bond and two sureties, with standard conditions of appearance, non‑tampering, and non‑pressurisation of witnesses.

Issues considered

Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and vague allegations justify granting bail to the accused.
Whether there is a reasonable apprehension that the accused will tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses if released on bail.
Whether the accused is entitled to bail under the provisions of Sections 115(2), 351(3), 352 and 105 of the Indian Penal Code.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 105, 115(2), 351(3), 352

Subjects

bail
false implication
delayed FIR
vague allegations
evidence tampering
witness intimidation
Indian Penal Code

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27669 of 2026

Rahul Gupta @ Nitish Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Girijesh Kumar Gupta, Ram Chandra
Solanki
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vikas Narayan Rai

Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

1. Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Vikas Narayan Rai, counsel for the
informant and Sri Shashank Shekhar Pandey, learned AGA for the State-
opposite party. Perused the material available on record.

2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 83 of 2026, under Sections 115(2),
351(3), 352, 105 B.N.S., Police Station- Kotwali, District- Ballia, during the
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 occurred on
25.02.2026. As per the allegations contained in the first information report,
the applicant along with three named accused persons is alleged to have
assaulted the brother of the informant. As per the postmortem report, the
brother of the informant was admitted at Trauma Centre and Superspeciality
Hospital, IMS BHU, Varanasi on 26.02.2026 at 20.05 hours. Thereafter, the
first information report was lodged on 28.02.2026 at 02.11 hours. The
brother of the informant died on 28.02.2026 at 23.18 hours. As per the
postmortem report, the deceased sustained four injuries; namely- (1)
surgically stapled wound of length 20 cms with 19 surgical stapler pins in
situ present on the abdomen 20 cms below the sternum along the midline, (2)
multiple blister wounds of size ranging between 2 cms x 2 cms to 3 cms x 2
cms present all over the left arm and forearm, (3) blackish contusion of size
8 cms x 6 cms present in the front left knee joint in the midline and (4)
multiple brownish-black scabbed abrasion of size ranging between 1 cm x 1
cm to 2 cms x 1 cm present in the front of left lower leg extending between
left knee to left ankle. In the opinion of the doctor, cause of death is due to
BAIL No. 27669 of 2026
2

septic shock as a result of intestinal perforation and this is sufficient to
cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The nature of injuries shows
that the deceased was provided treatment prior to death, however the
medical papers in respect thereof do not form part of the case diary. The
delay in lodging the first information report in the facts of the present case is
fatal to the prosecution case. Vague and general allegations have been
levelled against the applicant. At this stage, there is no clarity with regard to
exact role of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 06.07.2026 having
no criminal antecedents and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not
misuse the said liberty.

4. Learned AGA and counsel for the informant have 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 first information report has been lodged
belatedly. Vague and general allegations have been levelled against the
applicant. At this stage, there is no clarity with regard to exact role of the
applicant. The initial treatment provided to the deceased prior to his death
does not form part of the case dairy. Further, the applicant has no criminal
antecedents and has remained confined for more than two 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 delay the trial or
intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of
the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

6. Let the applicant Rahul Gupta @ Nitish Kumar, involved in the
aforesaid case crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and
two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court
concerned subject to the conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

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.

September 11, 2026
Manish Kr

(Vivek Varma,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
MANISH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…