Allahabad High Court
RAMBHANversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that, prima facie, the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The applicant, Rambhan, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 280 of 2026) under Sections 103(1), 238 and 61(2) of the Indian Penal Code. He argued that he was falsely implicated, the FIR was filed 39 days after the incident, he was not named in the FIR, and the only accusation against him came from a non‑eyewitness Gram Pradhan. The prosecution opposed bail, but the court noted the delay, lack of eyewitness testimony, and the applicant’s clean record. Finding that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail, the court ordered his release on personal bond and sureties with standard conditions. The order emphasized that the bail decision would not prejudice the trial judge’s independent assessment of the evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the absence of an eyewitness justify granting bail.
- Whether the applicant’s non‑mention in the FIR and alleged false implication warrant bail.
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing, justifying denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 103, 238, 61
Subjects
- bail
- delay in FIR
- false implication
- eyewitness absence
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 103
- Section 238
- Section 61
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31897 of 2026
Rambhan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravi Shankar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Ravi Shankar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
D.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on
record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 280 of 2026, under Sections
103(1), 238, 61(2) BNS, Police Station Bisuali, District Budaun, 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 thirty nine days and there is no explanation of the said
delay caused. The applicant is not named in the FIR. His name has surfaced
for the first time in the statement of the Gram Pradhan, Omveer Singh, as an
afterthought, who is not an eye-witness. The said witness has stated that
applicant was seen going to and fro in the village in the night of the incident.
There is no eye-witness account. Even the daughter of the deceased person
has only opined about the purportive motive of the crime, which does not
carry any weight.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that there is no
criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since
12.7.2026 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is
released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
BAIL No. 31897 of 2026
2
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
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 statement of the daughter of the deceased; the delay in
FIR; the fact that applicant is not named in the FIR and there being no eye-
witness account of the incident 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- Rambhan 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.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant
shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent
opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 9, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…