Allahabad High Court

KARAN SAINIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 22 September 2026
Bench: AVNISH SAXENA

Holding

The Court held that the accused is entitled to bail as the injuries were limited and there was no intention to commit murder.

Summary

The accused Karan Saini applied for bail in a case involving alleged assault under several IPC sections, claiming false implication and that the injuries were minor except one grievous fracture. The informant alleged that the accused and others assaulted them with an iron rod and a sharp-edged weapon, but the counsel argued the assault was not intended to murder and was provoked by the victims' intoxication. The State opposed bail, while the coordinate bench had already granted bail to co-accused. The Court considered the nature and extent of injuries, the lack of intent to kill, and the applicant's cooperation and bail history. Relying on Supreme Court dicta in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re, the Court allowed the bail application, ordering release on personal bond and sureties. The accused was directed to cooperate for speedy disposal of the trial.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused given the nature of injuries and alleged false implication
Whether the seriousness of offences under IPC sections 191, 190, 109, 131, 115, 352, 351 warrants denial of bail
Whether the accused's criminal history and cooperation affect the bail decision

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 115(2), 131, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(3), 352

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
Indian Penal Code
assault
false implication
Supreme Court precedent
Uttar Pradesh

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33892 of 2026

Karan Saini
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bratendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Pankaj Dwivedi

Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

1. Sri Bratendra Singh, learned counsel for accused applicant hands up
supplementary affidavit explaining the criminal history, the same is taken
on record.

1A. Heard Sri Singh, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri Manindra
Mohan Pandey, learned advocate, holding the brief, appeared for the
informant and learned A.G.A. for State.

2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Karan Saini to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 250 of 2026, under
Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 131, 115(2), 352, 351(3) of BNS,
P.S.- Kurawali, District- Mainpuri, during the pendency of trial.

3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the accused
applicant has been falsely implicated in FIR dated 18.06.2026 lodged by
one of the injured with the allegation against six named persons including
the applicant with the allegation that the accused persons had assaulted
the informant and his friend Vijay, Vipul, Anurag and Gajendra with iron
rod and sharp edged weapon. It is the contention of learned counsel that
four person including the informant had suffered simple injuries whereas
Gajendra one of the injured suffered fracture of the ulna bone which is the
only grievous injury sustained by the injured. It is further contended that
the informant and other injured came to the village of the accused
applicant under the influence of liquor and were creating ruckus which
had led to the altercation between them and assault. The assault was not
BAIL No. 33892 of 2026
2

made with the intention to commit murder but it was the deterrent to drag
the informant and other injured from the areas. Further contended that the
other co-accused have already been granted bail by the coordinate Bench
of this Court and by this Court. Further contended that the accused
applicant has three cases criminal history and in all the cases, he is on
bail. Investigation is continuing. The applicant is co-operating in the
investigation. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since
31.07.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. for State 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 number and nature of injuries and that none suffered
the injury by the sharp edged weapon, 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 23, 2026
Shivangi

Digitally signed by :-
SHIVANGI YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…