Allahabad High Court
FARMANversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The Court held that bail must be granted on the ground of parity with the co‑accused and the applicant’s clean record, subject to standard conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Farman, applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 416 of 2026) involving offences under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 5 and 9 of the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025. The High Court considered the facts, the lack of any prior criminal record, and the fact that a similarly situated co‑accused, Shakib, had already been granted bail in a related application. Counsel for the applicant argued for release on personal bond and sureties, while the State opposed the application. The Court applied the principle of parity, noting that equal treatment of co‑accused warranted bail. Consequently, the Court ordered the applicant’s release on bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses. The order emphasized that breach of conditions would lead to cancellation of bail and would not affect the trial on merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offences alleged under the IPC and the Online Gaming Act.
- Whether the principle of parity with a co‑accused previously granted bail warrants granting bail to the applicant.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal history influences the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2)
- Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 — s. 5, 9
Subjects
- bail
- parity
- Indian Penal Code
- Online Gaming Act
- sureties
- witness tampering
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32305 of 2026
Farman
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pankaj Kumar Ojha, Shiv Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.8 out of 76)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Mohit
Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.416 of 2026, under Sections 318(4), 336(3),
338, 340(2) BNS and Section 5/9 of Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act,
2025, Police Station Lohiyanagar, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by
learned counsels for the parties, and taking into consideration that similarly placed co-
accused, Shakib, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated
24.8.2026 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.29246 of 2026, coupled with the fact
that applicant has no criminal history, the Court is of the view that the applicant has
made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.
5. Let the applicant- Farman, be released on bail in the aforementioned case crime on
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned,
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. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein
shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 11, 2026
Vikas Verma
Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…