Allahabad High Court
DHIRENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The applicant, Dhirendra Singh, sought bail in a case under Sections 5 and 25 of the Arms Act, alleging innocence and claiming that the recovery of a country‑made pistol and related tools from his possession was false. He had been in custody since 12 August 2026 and had no prior criminal record. The State opposed the bail, but the court found no cogent evidence against him and, without commenting on the merits, concluded that he had made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the court ordered his release on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of non‑tampering with evidence, non‑intimidation of witnesses, and appearance before the trial court. The court also clarified that its observations would not prejudice the trial judge’s independent assessment.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail pending trial under Sections 5 and 25 of the Arms Act in the absence of cogent evidence.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25, 5
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
- presumption of innocence
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32995 of 2026
Dhirendra Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sachin Kanaujiya, Shivam Kanojiya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No.41 out of 291)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Sachin Kanaujiya, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.K.S.
Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on
record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 219 of 2026, under Sections 5/25
Arms Act, Police Station Bilhaur, District Kanpur Nagar, 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. A
barrel of county made pistol has been recovered from the possession of the
applicant and several implements of manufacturing the said country made
pistols have been shown recovered from the joint possession of the applicant
and two more co-accused persons. The said recovery has been falsely foisted
on them.
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
12.8.2026 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is
released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
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
BAIL No. 32995 of 2026
2
disputed.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, there being no cogent evidence against the
applicant 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- Dhirendra Singh, 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 16, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…