Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

ANUJversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided

Holding

The court held that a prima facie case for bail existed and granted bail to the applicant.

Summary

Anuj applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 82 of 2026) filed under Sections 140(1), 103(1) and 238 of the Indian Penal Code. He claimed that the FIR was lodged four days after the alleged incident and was based solely on speculation, with no eyewitness testimony or last‑seen evidence linking him to the crime. The applicant also highlighted his clean criminal record and his willingness to cooperate with the trial. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the delay in filing the FIR and the absence of substantive evidence as factors favoring release. Without passing on the merits, the court held that a prima facie case for bail existed. Consequently, the court granted bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and standard conditions.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted when the FIR is delayed and lacks ocular or last‑seen evidence against the accused
  • Whether the applicant’s clean record and claim of innocence justify bail pending trial

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • delay in FIR
  • lack of evidence
  • Indian Penal Code
  • criminal procedure
  • presumption of innocence

Judgment

            HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
           CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31673 of 2026

Anuj
                                                                  .....Applicant(s)
                                        Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                     .....Opposite
                                                                           Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                         :   Vijay Singh Sengar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                    :   G.A.

Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.14 out of 172 T.C.)

                              HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Vijay Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Abhishek Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material
placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.82 of 2026, under Sections 140(1),
103(1), 238 BNS, Police Station Lahchura, District Jhansi, during the
pendency of trial.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The
FIR is delayed by about four days and there is no explanation of the said
delay caused. Prior to the institution of FIR, the informant had filed a
missing report on 30.6.2026, but she did not whisper a single word against
any accused person or the applicant either in the said missing report.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the FIR has been
instituted only on the basis of speculations and there is no ocular account of
the incident. Even there is no last seen evidence against the applicant. The
applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 6.8.2026. He undertakes
to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but the
submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be
                                                                                                 BAIL No. 31673 of 2026
                                                                      2


                                    disputed.

                                    7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
                                    learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
                                    consideration the delay in institution of FIR coupled with the fact that there
                                    is no ocular account of the incident and also there being no last seen
                                    evidence against the applicant, and without expressing any opinion on the
                                    merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has
                                    made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

                                    8. Let the applicant- Anuj, be released on bail in the aforementioned case
                                    crime on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of
                                    the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions
                                    that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall
                                    appear before the trial court as required.

                                    9. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
                                    herein shall not affect the trial on merits.



                                                                                                 (Krishan Pahal,J.)
                                    September 9, 2026
                                    Vikas Verma




Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.