Allahabad High Court
NEMCHANDversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that the applicant has made out a case for bail and allowed the bail application.
Summary
The applicant, Nemchand, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 540 of 2025) involving offences under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act. The court considered his criminal history, which was explained, and noted that bail cannot be denied solely on past offences if the bail criteria are otherwise satisfied. The applicant, an employee of HDFC Bank, claimed that a public welfare centre was handed over to a co-accused, and no merit of the case was decided. The court found that the applicant had made out a case for bail and ordered his release on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses. The bail was granted with a warning that breach of conditions would lead to cancellation.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the nature of the offences and his criminal antecedents
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
- Information Technology Act — s. 66D
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Indian Penal Code
- Information Technology Act
- prior criminal history
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31825 of 2026
Nemchand
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vipin Gangwar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No.67 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 Vipin Gangwar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.M.
Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on
record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 540 of 2025, under Sections
318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) BNS and 66D of Information Technology
Act, Police Station Nawabganj, District Bareilly, during the pendency of
trial.
4. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant 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 has been properly explained.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the evidence on
record, taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for the
applicant that he is an employee in the HDFC bank and that the said public
welfare center was handed over by the applicant to co-accused person and
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie, the
BAIL No. 31825 of 2026
2
Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
7. Let the applicant- Nemchand, who is involved in aforementioned case
crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties
each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to
verification of sureties, with the condition that he shall not tamper with
evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as
required.
8. Breach of any of the above condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The
observation herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 9, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…