Allahabad High Court
DEVASHISH NIGAMversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The accused is entitled to bail and the bail application is allowed.
Summary
The accused, Devashish Nigam, applied for bail in a case under sections 115(2), 352, 109(1) and 117(2) of the BNS, alleging he assaulted a 38‑year‑old woman with a brick. The FIR was lodged by the victim's brother, but the medical report showed only minor injuries and the victim’s statement was inconsistent, claiming the assault arose from a dispute after she was given water and a cold drink. The accused has no prior criminal record and has been in custody since 5 July 2026. The State opposed bail, but the Court noted the nature of the injuries, the missing weapon and the contradictory statements, and, relying on recent Supreme Court dicta, decided the applicant is entitled to bail. The Court ordered his release on personal bond and two sureties, without addressing the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under sections 115(2), 352, 109(1) and 117(2) of the BNS given the facts of the alleged assault.
- Whether the inconsistencies in the victim’s statement and the absence of the alleged weapon justify granting bail.
- Whether the Supreme Court precedents in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail in re are applicable to this bail application.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- inconsistent statements
- weapon not recovered
- Supreme Court precedent
- personal bond
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31439 of 2026
Devashish Nigam
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Aishwarya Verdhan, Sr. Advocate,
Yashaswin Venugopal Bajpai
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Ms. Vishakha Pandey, learned advocate, holding the brief,
appears for the accused applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Devashish Nigam to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 289 of 2026,
under Sections 115(2), 352, 109(1), 117(2) of BNS, P.S.- Bithoor,
District- Kanpur Nagar during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for accused applicant that the
FIR has been lodged by the brother of the injured/victim on 4.7.2026 with
the allegation that the accused applicant, who is also distant relative of the
injured sister of the informant has assaulted the victim by a brick. It is
further contended that the medico legal examination of the injured was
carried out wherein two injuries were shown on the person of the injured,
which is in the supplementary medical report shows no abnormality. It is
further contended that the statement of the victim itself shows that she has
called the accused applicant for providing drinking water at the hospital
and after her treatment she was taken by the accused applicant in his car
and administered her a cold drink. There was some altercation between
the two, which led to the assault. It is further contended that the victim is
38 years old lady, who wants to marry the accused applicant and it is the
self inflicted wound, which was suffered by the injured. It is further
contended that the injuries if taken to consideration does not reflect that it
has been hurt with the intention of committing murder. The charge sheet
BAIL No. 31439 of 2026
2
has been submitted. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant
is languishing in jail since 5.7.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on
bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application.
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 and the weapon
allegedly used, which has not been recovered and prima facie inconsistent
statement of the victim and the version of the FIR, the accused applicant
is entitled to be enlarged 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
Krishna*
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…