Allahabad High Court
PRADEEPversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The bail application is dismissed as it lacks merit.
Summary
The applicant, Pradeep, was arrested in connection with Crime No.293 of 2024, charged under IPC sections 302, 120‑B, 504, 506, 34 and Arms Act sections 3, 25 and 27. He has been in custody since 19 June 2024 and filed a second bail application after an earlier one was rejected. The counsel for the applicant offered no new ground for bail, merely citing the length of incarceration and a discrepancy between the forensic report and the recovered gun. The Court found the application devoid of merit and rejected the bail plea, directing the trial court to dispose of the case expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments. The observations were limited to the bail application and do not affect the trial’s merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the absence of any new ground and the period of incarceration.
- Whether the mismatch between the forensic report and the recovered firearm justifies granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25, 27, 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120, 302, 34, 504, 506, B
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- IPC
- Arms Act
- pre‑trial detention
- trial expeditiousness
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32069 of 2026
Pradeep
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sarthak Singh, Vimlesh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.1 out of 76)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Sarthak Singh, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Ram Mohit Yadav,
learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first one was
rejected by this Court vide order dated 19.2.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No.27426 of 2025.
4. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.293
of 2024, under Sections 302, 120-B, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C. and 3/25/27 Arms Act, Police
Station Khair, District Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant could not produce any new ground for pressing
the instant bail application except the period of incarceration undergone by the
applicant as he is in jail since 19.6.2024 and that the FSL report does not match with
the gun recovered from the him, as such, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to
the applicant. The instant bail application is found devoid of merits and is,
accordingly, rejected.
6. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be
decided expeditiously, in accordance with law, without granting unnecessary
adjournment to either party, if there is no legal impediment.
7. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by
the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall
have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 11, 2026
Vikas Verma
Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…