Allahabad High Court
SUNIL KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The court held that the accused is entitled to bail and granted it.
Summary
The accused Sunil Kumar applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 492 of 2026) involving alleged assault on an informant and her husband, with injuries reported. The applicant argued that the FIR was filed due to a family property dispute, that he himself suffered an injury, and that he had cooperated with the investigation, citing a single prior case under the Electricity Act. The State opposed the bail, but the court considered the nature and number of injuries, the cross‑version of the FIR, and the applicant's cooperation. Relying on Supreme Court dicta in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, the court concluded that bail was appropriate. Consequently, the court ordered the release of the applicant on personal bond and sureties, without addressing the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail despite the alleged assault and injuries.
- Whether the nature and seriousness of injuries and the cross‑version of the FIR justify granting bail.
- Whether the applicant's prior criminal history and cooperation with investigation affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 109(1), 115(2), 131, 351(2)
- BNSS — s. 173(4)
- Electricity Act
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- property dispute
- injury
- cooperation with investigation
- personal bond
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33715 of 2026
Sunil Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit has been filed explaining criminal history, the
same is taken on record.
1A. Heard Sri Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for accused
applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Sunil Kumar to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 492 of 2026,
under Sections 109(1), 131, 115(2), 351(2) of BNS, P.S.- Kotwali City,
District- Bijnor during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for accused applicant that the
accused applicant has been implicated in FIR dated 27.6.2026 lodged by
one of the injured Sarita against four accused persons including
the accused applicant with the allegation that on 26.6.2026 there was an
assault on the informant and her husband Bhupendra Singh carried out by
the accused persons with favda, wherein Bhupendra Singh suffered
grievous injuries on his head as there is reported fracture. It is further
contended that root cause for the implication is the initial transfer of
property by the father of informant in favour of accused applicant and due
to fight among children, the elders have been involved. It is further
contended that the accused applicant Sunil Kumar also suffered injury on
his person. His brother has moved a complaint before the Superintendent
of Police Bijnor against the injured and three others. The FIR is not
registered and the accused applicant has resorted to an application under
BAIL No. 33715 of 2026
2
Section 173(4) BNSS. It is further contended that except one injury, no
other injury is serious in nature. The accused applicant is co-operating in
the investigation, which is continuing. The applicant has one case
criminal history, which is of Electricity Act, wherein final report is
submitted. The applicant is languishing in jail since 1.8.2026. He seeks
enlargement of accused on bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering the nature and number of injury and the cross version of
the FIR, the accused applicant is entitled to be enlarged 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
Krishna*
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…