Allahabad High Court
MANOJversusSTATE 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 of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Manoj, who is accused in Crime No. 717 of 2025 under multiple IPC sections including 190, 191, 109, 115, 117, 131, 324, 333, 351 and 352. Manoj contended that he was never named in the FIR and was implicated only through an informer, asserting his innocence and pointing out that co‑accused had already been granted bail. He had been in custody since 7 August 2026 and submitted a supplementary affidavit and undertook not to misuse liberty. The State opposed the bail, but the court, after reviewing the record and the circumstances, concluded that bail could be granted without expressing any view on the merits. The court ordered his release on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence, intimidation of witnesses, and commission of similar offences. The order clarified that the observations are limited to the bail application and do not affect the trial’s merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused during the pendency of trial for offences under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 109, 115(2), 117(2), 131, 324(2), 333, 351(3) and 352 of the IPC
- Whether the applicant's claim of non‑inclusion in the FIR and alleged false implication justify bail
- Whether the bail granted to co‑accused and the applicant's personal circumstances warrant bail in this case
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115, 117, 131, 190, 191, 324, 333, 351, 352
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- IPC sections
- false implication
- trial pendency
- sureties
- high court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30298 of 2026
Manoj
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Lalit Prakash Gangwar, Suraj Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant 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. 717 of 2025, under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3),
109, 115(2), 117(2), 131, 324(2), 333, 351(3), 352 BNS, Police Station-
Kotwali, District- Mathura, 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 applicant is not named in the FIR and
his name was surfaced in the matter during the course of investigation, on
the basis of information furnished by police informer. 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. No
specific role has been assigned to the applicant and none of the injuries of
the injured persons has been found to be dangerous to life. Co-accused
Kailash and Bheemsen have been granted anticipatory bail by co-ordinate
Bench of this Court, whereas co-accused Mahesh Chand, Deepak, Sonu
and Suraj have been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench(s) of this Court.
Bail orders of the co-accused persons have been annexed as Annexure
No. 11 of the instant bail application. Criminal history of the applicant has
been explained in the affidavit and supplementary affidavit filed in
support of the instant bail application and he is languishing in jail since
7.8.2026. 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.
BAIL No. 30298 of 2026
2
The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.
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, Manoj 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 8, 2026
KK Patel
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHN KANT PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…