Allahabad High Court

NISHANTversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 20 September 2026
Bench: JAI PRAKASH TIWARI

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail during the trial, subject to conditions, despite the seriousness of the alleged offences.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Nishant, who was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 220 of 2026) involving alleged offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 351(3), 118(1), 118(2) and 324(2) of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant claimed innocence, asserted that he was falsely implicated, and pointed out that no specific role or material evidence was attached to him, while co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined the nature of the alleged offences, the evidence, the applicant’s clean record, the delay in filing the FIR, and the heavy pendency of cases in the courts. Concluding that the applicant was entitled to bail during the pendency of trial, the Court granted bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties and several conditions. The order expressly refrained from commenting on the merits of the case.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail during the pendency of trial for offences under the IPC sections mentioned
Whether the circumstances, including delay in FIR filing and lack of specific evidence, justify granting bail

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 191(2), 191(3), 324(2), 351(3)

Subjects

bail
Indian Penal Code
criminal procedure
sureties
conditions of bail
presumption of innocence

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33531 of 2026

Nishant
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Dwivedi, Yogesh Kumar
Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-
respondent and perused the record of the case.

2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on
bail in Case Crime No. 220 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2),
351(3), 118(1), 118(2), 324(2) BNS, Police Station- Sirsaganj, District-
Firozabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due
to some ulterior motive. It is next submitted that applicant is having no
concern with the allegations levelled against him and he has not committed
any offence as alleged by prosecution. It is next submitted that general role
has been assigned to all the accused persons. No specific role has been
assigned to the applicant. It is submitted that nothing has been recovered
from the possession of the applicant or his pointing out. He further
submitted that the incident took place on 25.04.2026 and its FIR was lodged
on 26.04.2026 after about fifteen hours without giving any plausible
explanation for delay in lodging the FIR. The applicant has no criminal
history. He further submitted that co-accused Mahesh Kumar and
Gopikishan have been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide
order dated 15.09.2026, passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 26947 of
2026. He next submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since
23.03.2026. It is also submitted that the applicant undertakes that he will not
BAIL No. 33531 of 2026
2

misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of
heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early
conclusion of trial.

4. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.

5. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the
accused, severity of the punishment, and submissions of learned counsel for
the parties, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be
enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

6. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the
instant bail application is allowed.

7. Let applicant, Nishant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his
executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following
conditions:-

(i). The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii). The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii). The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless
personal presence is exempted.

(iv). The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of
which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is
suspected.

(v). The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer
or tamper with the evidence.

8. It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the
sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at
BAIL No. 33531 of 2026
3

liberty to cancel the bail.

10. 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.

(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
September 21, 2026
v.k. updh.

Digitally signed by :-
VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…