Allahabad High Court
KALA @ RIHANversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to bail given the absence of his name in the FIR, the minor nature of injuries, and procedural deficiencies, without addressing the substantive merits of the case.
Summary
The applicant Kala @ Rihan sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 148 of 2026) involving alleged assault on the informant's son Amit on 3 April 2026. The FIR, lodged on 4 April 2026, initially named four persons and an anonymous individual, but did not name the applicant; identification was later made through CCTV footage and the victim's subsequent statement, without a test identification parade. The applicant, who has no prior criminal record, has been in custody since 25 August 2026 and contended that the nature and number of injuries were minor and that procedural lapses existed. The State opposed bail, but the Court, after reviewing the record, held that the absence of the applicant’s name in the FIR and the modest injuries warranted bail, without addressing the merits of the case. Relying on Supreme Court dicta in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) 10 SCC 674 and Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail in Re (2024) 10 SCC 685, the Court ordered the applicant’s release on personal bond and two sureties. The Court also directed the applicant to cooperate with the judicial process for a speedy disposal of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite being identified through CCTV and the victim's statement without a test identification parade.
- Whether the nature and extent of injuries justify the grant of bail.
- Whether procedural irregularities in the FIR naming the accused affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Statutes (BNS) — s. 109(1), 126(2), 131, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- identification parade
- FIR
- injury assessment
- Supreme Court precedent
- personal bond
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33815 of 2026
Kala @ Rihan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kuldeep Singh Tomar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Kuldeep Singh Tomar, 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-
Kala @ Rihan to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 148 of 2026,
under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 131, 126(2), 352 of BNS,
P.S.- Budhana, District- Muzaffar Nagar during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for accused applicant that the
informant Mangeram has lodged the FIR on 4.4.2026 against four named
and one anonymous persons. The incident is dated 3.4.2026 occurred at
19:20 hrs alleging in the FIR that the son of the informant, namely, Amit
was returning home when he has been surrounded by the accused persons
that they have assaulted him. It is further contended that the injured
suffered three injuries. The weapon shown in the FIR is iron rod and
sharp edged weapon. The injuries sustained by the injured are three and
all are simple in nature as per the injury report and the supplementary
medico legal report. It is further contended that the weapons used shown
in the medical report is hard and blunt object. The accused applicant has
not been named in the FIR. He has initially not been named either by the
injured or the eye witness. Subsequently, on the basis of CCTV footage,
name of the accused applicant has been reflected. There is no test
identification parade but the injured in his subsequent statement has
named him. The charge sheet has been submitted. The applicant has no
BAIL No. 33815 of 2026
2
criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.8.2026. 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 injuries and that the name of the
accused applicant has not reflected in 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 23, 2026
Krishna*
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…