Allahabad High Court
VIPIN @ PILLEversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The court held that the accused is entitled to bail.
Summary
The accused, Vipin @ Pille, applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 344 of 2025) involving a single gunshot injury, alleging that the main role was played by co‑accused Sohel Yadav. The applicant's counsel highlighted that the only criminal history on record was a police encounter arrest, and that the injured's statement merely implicated the applicant as having caught hold of the victim. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted that the principal culpability rested with the co‑accused and that the trial was already underway with two fact witnesses examined. Relying on Supreme Court dicta in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and another 2024 bail policy case, the court concluded that the applicant was entitled to bail. Consequently, the bail was granted on condition of a personal bond and two sureties, without addressing the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused when the principal offence is attributed to a co‑accused.
- Whether the accused's prior police encounter arrest precludes bail.
- Whether the stage of trial (examination of witnesses) permits the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 109(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- gunshot injury
- co‑accused
- personal bond
- sureties
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33803 of 2026
Vipin @ Pille
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Araf Khan, Lihazur Rahman Khan
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 Araf Khan, 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-
Vipin @ Pille to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 344 of 2025,
under Sections 109(1), 3(5) of BNS, P.S.- Jait, District- Mathura 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 18.7.2025 lodged by
Satish Chandra father of injured Pradeep, who suffered one gunshot
injury on his right side of the chest. It is further contended that
the accused applicant had been arrested by the police in a police
encounter case, which is only criminal history against the accused
applicant subsequent to the incident, wherein, the bail is applied. It is
further contended that the co-accused Sohel Yadav has been assigned the
main role of hitting the injured by gunshot as Sohel's sister and the injured
were having illicit relations, which was the point of dispute between the
co-accused and the injured. In the statement of the injured, the role
attributed on the accused applicant is of catching hold. After submission
of the charge sheet, the trial has proceeded and two witnesses of fact have
already been examined including the injured. The applicant is languishing
BAIL No. 33803 of 2026
2
in jail since 21.7.2025. There is no point of influencing the witnesses.
The accused applicant has to take his defence for which, he seeks to be
released 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 role attributed on the accused applicant and it is a
single gunshot injury case wherein, the main role is attributed on the co-
accused, 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 30, 2026
Krishna*
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…