Allahabad High Court
SOHANVIR @ PINTUversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The bail application is allowed.
Summary
The applicant, Sohanvir @ Pintu, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No.100 of 2026) under Section 109(1) of the IPC (Bailable Non-Compounded) and Sections 3, 25 and 28 of the Arms Act. He claimed he was falsely implicated and was actually injured in police cross‑fire, not responsible for any police injury. The State opposed the bail, but the court found the applicant's claim credible and noted that no police personnel were injured. On a prima facie basis, the court concluded that the applicant had made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail was granted subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 109(1) IPC and the Arms Act in view of the facts that the applicant was injured in police cross‑fire and no police injury occurred
- Whether the applicant has made out a prima facie case for bail despite the charges under the Arms Act
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25, 28, 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- false implication
- police cross‑fire
- prima facie
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31738 of 2026
Sohanvir @ Pintu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sushil Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.44 out of 318)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for
the applicant is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material
placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.100 of 2026, under Sections
109(1) BNS and Section 3/25/28 of Arms Act, Police Station Shahpur,
District Muzaffar Nagar, 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. It is
a police party firing no injury case, rather the applicant sustained gunshot
injury in the crossfire by the police. The criminal history assigned to the
applicant has been explained. He is in jail since 25.4.2026. He undertakes to
cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.
5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but the
submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be
disputed.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the fact that no injury has been sustained by any police
BAIL No. 31738 of 2026
2
personnel, rather the applicant sustained injury in the crossfire by the police,
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.
7. Let the applicant- Sohanvir @ Pintu, 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.
8. 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
Checking your session…