Allahabad High Court
MANISHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.
Summary
Manish, accused in a case under Sections 109(1), 352 and 3(5) B.N.S., applied for enlargement of bail after his earlier bail plea was rejected. He argued that other co‑accused (Gagan, Vishan Kana and Shivam) had been granted bail, and that he had no criminal antecedents. The State opposed, contending that Manish’s role in restraining the injured prevented his release. The Court noted the nature of the offence, the evidence and the fact that co‑accused had been bailed, but held that parity was not mandatory and that Manish’s case stood on a better footing. Consequently, the Court ordered his release on bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties and conditions to attend trial, not tamper with witnesses, and refrain from illegal activity.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the earlier rejection and the bail granted to co‑accused.
- Whether parity with co‑accused is a requisite factor in granting bail.
- Whether the nature of the offence and the applicant’s role preclude bail.
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- parity
- co‑accused
- Sections 109(1), 352, 3(5) B.N.S.
- trial conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31365 of 2026
Manish
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Deepak Rana
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 82
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the
State.
2. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case
Crime No. 02 of 2026, under Sections 109(1), 352 and 3(5) B.N.S., P.S.
Loni Border, District-Ghaziabad and is in jail since 2.1.2026, is seeking
enlargement on bail during the trial.
3. This is the second bail application of the applicant. The first bail
application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated
7.4.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application no. 11572 of 2026.
The only new ground on which the applicant is seeking enlargement on
bail through this application is that after rejection of first bail application
of the applicant, other co-accused persons Gagan, Vishal Kana, who were
assigned the role of catching hold, as well as another co-accused Shivam,
who is having the role of inflicting the knife injury to the injured, have
been granted bail by coordinate Benches of this Court, vide orders dated
7.5.2026, on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated
21.5.2026, 9.7.2026 and 20.5.2026 respectively passed in Criminal Misc.
Bail Application Nos. 15492 of 2026, 21457 of 2026 and 17157 of 2026.
He further submitted that no parity can be given, however the case of the
present accused stands on better footing than that of the main accused
Shivam. He lastly submitted that the applicant, who has no criminal
antecedents to his discredit and is in jail since 2.1.2026, is also entitled to
be enlarged on bail.
BAIL No. 31365 of 2026
2
4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application, arguing
that had the applicant not restrained the injured, he could have fled and
saved himself therefore, the accused applicant is not entitled to be
released on bail. However, he could not dispute the fact that other co-
accused Gagan and Vishal Kana, as well as the main accused Shivam,
who alleged to have inflicted the injury on the injured person have been
granted bail by this Court.
5. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the
accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for
the parties; However, other co-accused have been granted bail but no
parity can be extended but in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the
case, moreover the case of the applicant stands on better footing than that
of other co-accused Shivam, who has inflicted knife injuries to the
injured; without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this
Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail
during the pendency of the trial.
6. Let the applicant Manish involved in the aforesaid case be released on
bail 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 continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending
before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
ii. He will not tamper with the witnesses.
iii. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
7. It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the
sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be
at liberty to cancel the bail.
(Harvir Singh,J.)
September 8, 2026
Faridul
Digitally signed by :-
FAREEDUL HASAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…