Allahabad High Court
ADITYA ANANDversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
Bail was granted to the applicant on the ground of parity and the absence of a criminal history.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Aditya Anand, who was charged under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act and the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The applicant sought bail during the pendency of trial, arguing lack of prior criminal history and parity with a co‑accused, Avnish Yadav, who had already been released on bail in a similar case. The court examined the charges, the applicant’s clean record, and the precedent of granting bail to the co‑accused. Finding a prima facie case for bail and no reason to deny it, the court granted bail on the condition of personal bond, two sureties, and compliance with standard bail conditions. The order also stipulated that any breach, such as tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses, would lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the applicant during the pendency of trial.
- Whether the principle of parity with a co‑accused who was previously released on bail applies.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of criminal history warrants bail despite the serious nature of the charges.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Law Amendment Act — s. 7
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 121(1), 125, 127(2), 132, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 195(2), 285, 324(4), 326(G), 61(2)
- Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- parity principle
- criminal procedure
- Indian Penal Code
- no prior criminal record
- sureties
- witness tampering
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31779 of 2026
Aditya Anand
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ambreen Masroor, Fakharul Islam
Jafri, Sadrul Islam Jafri, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 56 out of 318)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Ms. Samra Usmani, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri
Sadrul Islam Jafri, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Srivastava,
learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.172 of 2026, under Section 191(2),
115(2), 121(1), 127(2), 324(4), 61(2), 191(3), 190, 326(G), 125, 132, 195(2),
285 BNS and 3/4 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act and 7 of
Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Phase-I, District -Gautam
Budh Nagar, during the pendency of trial.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration
the fact that similarly placed co-accused person, Avnish Yadav has already
been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 6.7.2026 passed in
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19140 of 2026 and that there is no
criminal history assigned to the applicant, 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. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on
the ground of parity.
5. Let the applicant- Aditya Anand, be released on bail in the
aforementioned case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two
sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned,
BAIL No. 31779 of 2026
2
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.
6. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 9, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…