Allahabad High Court
DASRATH NANDANversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The court held that the delay in the FIR, inconsistent medico‑legal report, and change in the alleged incident location entitled the accused to bail.
Summary
The accused, Dasrath Nandan, applied for bail in a case registered under Sections 109 and 352 of the BNS, alleging that the FIR was lodged belatedly and that the incident description was inconsistent. He claimed the assault allegation was false, highlighted a change in the reported location of the incident, and pointed out the absence of any diagnostic abnormality in the medico‑legal report. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the delay in filing the FIR, the inconsistent medical evidence, and the alteration of the crime scene as factors favoring bail. Relying on Supreme Court dicta in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and related bail policy, the court granted bail without addressing the merits of the case. The accused was ordered to be released on personal bond with two sureties and to cooperate with the judicial process.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted despite a delayed FIR and inconsistent medico‑legal evidence.
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail under Sections 109 and 352 of the BNS during trial.
- Whether the alteration of the alleged place of occurrence affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 109, 352
Subjects
- bail
- delayed FIR
- medico‑legal report
- Sections 109
- Section 352
- criminal procedure
- Uttar Pradesh
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31630 of 2026
Dasrath Nandan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sarthak Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Sri Sarthak Verma, learned counsel for applicant hands up
supplementary affidavit enclosing the additional documents in support of
bail application, the same is taken on record.
1A. Heard Sri Verma, learned counsel for accused applicant and learned
A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Dasrath Nandan to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 169 of 2026,
under Sections 109, 352 of BNS, P.S.- Kotwali Dehat, District- Mirzapur,
during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that a belated FIR
has been lodged by the wife of injured against the accused applicant, who
is neighbour, on 09.04.2026 at 21:16 hours for the alleged incident dated
08.04.2026 occurred at 14:00 hours. It is alleged in the FIR that the
accused applicant has called her husband Upendra to his house as there
was a monetary transaction between the two. Due to some altercation, the
accused applicant has assaulted Upendra with a vegetable knife and
stabbed in his abdomen. It is further contended that the accused has been
falsely implicated in this case. No such incident has occurred. There is
marked improvement in the place of incident through the case diary as the
initial occurrence is shown in the house of the accused applicant which
was later on transformed to the occurrence of the road in front of the
house of the informant. Further submits that there is no medico legal
BAIL No. 31630 of 2026
2
examination carried out initially and on subsequent treatment it is found
that there is no diagnostic abnormality. The accused applicant has no
criminal history. No recovery has been shown at the instance of the
accused applicant. The charge sheet is submitted. The accused applicant is
languishing in jail since 05.06.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on
bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. for State 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 apparent delay in FIR, inconsistent medico legal
examination report and the change in the place of incident, the
accused/applicant is entitled to be released 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 23, 2026
Sharad/-
Digitally signed by :-
SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…