Allahabad High Court
VINOD KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
Bail is granted on the ground of parity with a similarly situated co‑accused and the applicant's clean record.
Summary
Vinod Kumar applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 238 of 2026) involving offences under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act. The applicant has no prior criminal record. The learned counsel highlighted that a co‑accused, Ankit Kumar, had already been granted bail in a similar case, establishing a precedent of parity. The court examined the facts, the submissions of counsel, and the principle of equal treatment of similarly situated accused. Finding that the applicant satisfied the criteria for bail and that parity warranted the same relief, the court ordered his release on bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and standard conditions. The order emphasized that any breach of conditions would lead to cancellation of bail and would not affect the trial on merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to Vinod Kumar during the pendency of trial for the offences alleged under the IPC and IT Act.
- Whether the principle of parity with a similarly situated co‑accused justifies granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2)
- Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 66D
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- parity principle
- Indian Penal Code
- Information Technology Act
- trial pendency
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33193 of 2026
Vinod Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manu Sharma, Shubhanan Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.17 out of 114)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Manu Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Deepak Kumar
Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.238 of 2026, under Sections 318(4), 338,
336(3), 340(2) BNS and Section 66D of I.T. Act, Police Station Phase-III, District
Gautam Buddh Nagar, 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, Ankit Kumar, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated
25.8.2026 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.27798 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- Vinod Kumar, 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 17, 2026
Vikas Verma
Digitally signed by :-
VIKAS VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…