Allahabad High Court
RATAN GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The Court held that the accused is entitled to bail because the FIR was delayed and no test identification parade was conducted, despite the pending trial.
Summary
The accused Ratan Gupta applied for bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 31931 of 2026, relating to Case Crime No. 410 of 2024 under Sections 115(2), 109, 228 and 3(5) of the BNS. He argued that the FIR dated 26‑11‑2024 was filed late, that his name was derived only from the sister’s statement, and that no test identification parade had been conducted, while co‑accused Munna and two others had already been granted bail. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, held that the delay in filing the FIR and the absence of a test identification parade justified granting bail, without examining the merits of the case. Accordingly, the Court ordered his release on personal bond and two sureties, citing Supreme Court dicta in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail in re.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the lack of a test identification parade warrant the grant of bail to the accused.
- Whether the accused’s lack of prior criminal record and the bail granted to co‑accused affect the bail decision.
- Whether the provisions of Sections 115(2), 109, 228 and 3(5) of the BNS preclude bail at the stage of trial.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 109, 115(2), 228, 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- delayed FIR
- identification parade
- criminal procedure
- presumption of innocence
- personal bond
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31931 of 2026
Ratan Gupta
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shakti Dubey, Vinay Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit has been filed annexing additional documents
in support of the bail application, the same is taken on record.
1A. Heard Sri Vinay Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for accused
applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Ratan Gupta to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 410 of 2024,
under Sections 115(2), 109, 228, 3(5) of BNS, P.S.- Lalpur- Pandeypur,
District- Varanasi during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for accused applicant that the
accused applicant has been implicated during investigation of FIR dated
26.11.2024 lodged by the mother of injured Chandan against anonymous
persons. The incident is of 24.11.2024 whereas the FIR is delayed. During
investigation, three names have been reflected, namely, Munna, Shashi
and Ratan Gupta (present applicant). The name of the accused applicant
has been figured out from the statement of the sister of the injured. There
is one fire arm injury, which is attributed on the co-accused Munna, who
has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is further
contended that there is no test identification parade carried out. The other
two co-accused have already been granted bail. The accused applicant is
on better footing. There is no complicity. He has been falsely
implicated. The charge sheet has been submitted. The applicant has no
criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.2.2025. He
BAIL No. 31931 of 2026
2
seeks enlargement of accused on bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering that the name of the accused applicant has been figured
out in the statement of the sister of injured, apparently the FIR is delayed
and there is no test identification parade, the accused applicant is entitled
to be enlarged on bail.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is
allowed.
8. The accused/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of court concerned in view of observation made by the
Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in
re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and
speedy disposal.
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
September 23, 2026
Krishna*
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…