Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

ARIFversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided

Holding

The accused is entitled to bail and the bail application is allowed.

Summary

Arif applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 823 of 2015) involving alleged cheating with forged gold bars under IPC sections 419, 420, 392, 342, 504 and 506. The FIR, lodged on 26‑11‑2015, alleged that Arif transported the informant to the co‑accused but claimed he had no knowledge of the fraud and received no money. The State opposed bail, while Arif’s counsel argued lack of complicity and that he had not been arrested earlier. The court, after hearing both sides, held that despite the seriousness of the charges, Arif’s alleged role did not warrant continued detention and granted bail without addressing the merits of the case. Bail was ordered on a personal bond with two sureties, citing Supreme Court dicta in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) and Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail in re (2024).

Issues considered

  • Whether the accused, Arif, is entitled to bail despite pending charges under sections 419, 420, 392, 342, 504 and 506 IPC.
  • Whether the accused's alleged role as a transporter constitutes sufficient complicity to deny bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • IPC
  • cheating
  • gold bars
  • surety
  • personal bond
  • Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
         CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33332 of 2026

Arif
                                                            .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                     :   Mohd Imran Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                :   G.A.

Court No. - 69
                    HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

1. Heard Mohd. Imran Khan, learned counsel for accused applicant and
learned A.G.A. for State.

2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant/ accused-
 Arif to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 823 of 2015, under
Sections 419, 420, 392, 342, 504 and 506 IPC, P.S.- Kosikalan, District-
Mathura, during the pendency of trial.

3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the FIR has
been lodged on 26.11.2015 by one S.Srinawasan Kiran against two named
persons, namely, Rahul and Raju and some anonymous persons with the
allegation that the informant has been duped of money for the purchase of
gold bars. The informant when came to purchase the gold bars, the money
has been taken but forged gold bars have been given by the accused. The
role of accused/applicant attributed during investigation is that he has
transported the informant on his motorcycle to the village of the co-
accused. It is further contended that there is no other complicity attributed
on the accused/applicant. No amount has ever been credited to the
account of accused. He has no knowledge of any cheating with the
informant. The applicant was not knowing about submission of charge
sheet. He was never arrested during investigation. The accused/applicant
has criminal history of five cases, out of which in two cases final report is
submitted, in two cases he is on bail and in one case he is in jail. When he
was in jail Warrant B was issued against accused/applicant. The accused
                                                                                          BAIL No. 33332 of 2026
                                                                   2


                                    applicant is languishing in jail since 08.07.2026. He seeks to be enlarged
                                    on bail.

                                    4. Learned A.G.A. for State and learned counsel for the informant have
                                    opposed the prayer for bail.

                                    5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
                                    learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

                                    6. Considering the complicity of accused/applicant in the present case, the
                                    accused/applicant is entitled to be released 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 18, 2026
                                    Abhishek Sri.




Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.