Allahabad High Court
SUJAUDDIN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
Bail is to be granted as the applicants have satisfied the criteria and parity with a co‑accused who was previously released on bail.
Summary
The applicants, Sujauddin and another, sought bail in a criminal case under Sections 3, 5, 12 and 25 of the Arms Act arising from an incident in Meerut. The first applicant had no prior criminal record, while the second's alleged history was explained by counsel. The court noted that bail cannot be denied merely because of past convictions if the bail criteria are otherwise satisfied. It observed that a co‑accused, Mohd. Sajid Alias Leelu, had already been released on bail in a similar case, establishing parity. After considering the submissions, evidence and the principle of equality, the court held that the applicants had made out a case for bail and granted it subject to personal bond, sureties and standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicants are entitled to bail under the Arms Act despite alleged criminal antecedents.
- Whether the principle of parity with a similarly situated co‑accused warrants granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 12, 25, 3, 5
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- criminal antecedents
- parity
- sureties
- personal bond
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31559 of 2026
Sujauddin And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Suraj Upadhyay, Vivek Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 40 out of 185)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on
record.
2. Heard Sri Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri A.K.
Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on
record.
3. Applicants seek bail in Case Crime No. 487 of 2026, under Sections
3/5/12/25 of Arms Act, Police Station Lisari Gate, District Meerut, during
the pendency of trial.
4. Applicant no.1 has no criminal history. The criminal history assigned to
the applicant no.2 has been explained.
5. This Court is of the view that if a case for bail is otherwise made out,
an accused cannot be kept incarcerated solely on account of his criminal
antecedents. In the instant case, the criminal history assigned to the
applicant no.2 has been properly explained.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions
made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration that similarly placed co-accused person Mohd. Sajid Alias
Leelu has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated
31.8.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.30197 of 2026, and
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie the
BAIL No. 31559 of 2026
2
Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.
7. Let the applicants- Sujauddin and Sajid, be released on bail on
furnishing personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court
concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that they
shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear
before the trial court as required.
8. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 8, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…