Allahabad High Court
SANDEEP NAGARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The Court refused to enlarge bail to the applicant during the trial.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sandeep Nagar, who is accused in Crime No. 507 of 2025 under Sections 109(1), 131, 352 and 351(2) of the B.N.S. The applicant claimed innocence, stating that no incriminating material was recovered and that he has no prior criminal record. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, opposed bail, highlighting the FIR allegation that the applicant assaulted Rahul Tyagi, causing multiple grievous injuries as documented in an X‑ray report. After hearing both sides and reviewing the record, the Court found the seriousness of the alleged offences and the evidence of grievous hurt sufficient to deny bail. Consequently, the bail application was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged assault causing grievous injuries under Sections 109(1), 131, 352 and 351(2) of the B.N.S.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109(1), 131, 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- grievous hurt
- Section 109
- Section 131
- Section 352
- Section 351
- high court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2956 of 2026
Sandeep Nagar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Chauhan, Rahul Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ram Raj Pandey, Shubham Pandey,
G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant in the Court today
is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the
informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on
record.
3. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case
Crime No. 507 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 131, 352, 351(2) of
B.N.S., P.S. Loni, District-Ghaziabad, is seeking enlargement on bail
during the trial.
4. 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. He next submitted that general allegation of
assaulting the victim has been made against three named and some
unknown persons, including applicant. He further submitted that no
incriminating article or material has been recovered either from the
applicant or on his pointing out. He lastly submitted that the applicant,
who is in jail since 17.11.2025 and has no criminal antecedents to his
discredit is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.
5. On the other hand, the learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail and submitted that in the F.I.R. itself it is alleged that the
applicant-accused has assaulted the victim/injured Rahul Tyagi. He
BAIL No. 2956 of 2026
2
further submitted that, according to the X-ray report the injured Rahul
Tyagi sustained several injuries, which reads as under:-
"Fracture of left forearm, supra orbital bone of skull and fracture of
nasal bone;
Fracture of left 5th Metacarpal bone."
Opinion of Doctor : The injury nos. 1,2,3 and 5 are grievous in nature.
6. After having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record, this Court is not inclined to
enlarge the applicant on bail during the trial, hence this bail application is
rejected.
(Harvir Singh,J.)
April 10, 2026
Faridul
Digitally signed by :-
FAREEDUL HASAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…