Allahabad High Court
HAZARILALversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The Court held that the unexplained delay in filing the FIR and medical report, together with the applicant’s clean record, warranted the grant of bail.
Summary
The accused Hazarilal applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 347 of 2025) alleging that he was falsely implicated in an assault on 23 November 2025. He argued that the FIR was lodged more than 20 hours after the incident and the medical report was also delayed, raising doubts about the veracity of the complaint. The State opposed the bail, but the Court noted the unexplained delay, the applicant’s clean criminal record, and the possibility of false implication. Relying on the Supreme Court’s recent dicta in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and related bail policy, the Court granted bail without addressing the merits of the case. The bail was conditioned on a personal bond and two sureties of equal amount.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and the subsequent medical report justifies granting bail.
- Whether the accused’s lack of prior criminal history and claim of false implication warrant bail under CrPC provisions.
- Whether bail can be granted without delving into the merits of the case under Sections 115(2) and 109(1) of the CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 109(1), 115(2)
Subjects
- bail
- delay in FIR
- false implication
- Criminal Procedure Code
- personal bond
- sureties
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33592 of 2026
Hazarilal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Balbeer Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Balbeer Singh, learned counsel for accused applicant and
learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant/ accused-
Hazarilal to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 347 of 2025, under
Sections 115(2), 109(1) BNS, P.S.- Eka, District- Firozabad, during the
pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the accused
applicant has been falsely implicated in the FIR dated 23.11.2025 lodged
by Sri Rajkumar against the accused/applicant, who is the nephew of the
informant with the allegation that in the midnight of 23.11.2025, the
accused/applicant entered the house and assaulted the informant's brother
Virendra with knife. It is the contention of learned counsel for the
accused/applicant that there is explicit delay in lodging the FIR, which is
nearly more than 20 hours. Further submits that the medico legal
examination report, which is at page no. 40 shows that the sutured wound
was examined in the hospital on 24.11.2025 at 03:00 p.m. It is further
contended that the accused/applicant was working under the injured and
there was some arrears of his salary, which is to be paid. The
accused/applicant was demanding his salary as such he has been falsely
implicated in this case. There is no explanation for the delay in lodging
the FIR and subsequent delay in medical report. The applicant has no
criminal history. The charge sheet is submitted. The accused applicant is
BAIL No. 33592 of 2026
2
languishing in jail since 25.11.2025. 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 apparent delay in lodging the FIR and subsequent
medical examination report with delay, 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 29, 2026
Abhishek Sri.
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…