Allahabad High Court

ABU UWAIDAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 29 September 2026
Bench: JAI PRAKASH TIWARI

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Abu Uwaida in a criminal case (Crime No. 0234 of 2026) under Sections 61(2), 310(2) and 317(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The applicant claimed innocence, alleging false implication based on a co‑accused's confession and lack of independent evidence. The State opposed bail, but the court noted that similar co‑accused had already been released on bail and that the applicant had no proven involvement. Weighing the heavy pendency of cases and the applicant's undertaking, the court decided to grant bail without commenting on the merits. The bail was conditioned on a personal bond, two sureties, and specific undertakings not to tamper with evidence, intimidate witnesses, or commit a similar offence.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 61(2), 310(2) and 317(2) of the CrPC given the facts of the case.
Whether the applicant's alleged involvement and prior criminal history preclude the grant of bail.
Whether the conditions imposed on bail are appropriate and sufficient to safeguard the trial process.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 310(2), 317(2), 61(2)

Subjects

bail
Criminal Procedure Code
Section 61
Section 310
Section 317
sureties
trial pendency
conditions of bail

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33953 of 2026

Abu Uwaida
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shubham Singh, Sumit Kumar
Srivastava, Vinod Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State
and perused the record of the case.

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on
bail in Case Crime No. 0234 of 2026, under Sections 61(2), 310(2),
317(2) BNS, Police Station- Dhoomanganj, District- Prayagraj, during
pendency of the trial in the court concerned.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case
due to some ulterior motive. The present FIR has been lodged against six
unknown persons regarding the alleged incident of snatching/loot. The
name of the applicant surfaced in the present matter during the course of
investigation through the confessional statement of co-accused person. It
is next submitted that applicant is having no concern with the allegations
levelled against him and he has not committed any offence as alleged by
prosecution. It is next submitted that a false recovery has been shown
from the possession of the applicant. There is no independent witness of
the alleged recovery. Co-accused namely Mohd Ahmad @ Ahmar, Rishu
Soni@ Sumit Kumar Soni and Mohd. Wakas have been granted bail by
this Court vide orders dated 15.9.2026, 1.9.2026 and 11.9.2026 in
Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 31556 of 2026, 30614 of 2026 and
31197 of 2026. It is next submitted that apart from the present case, the
applicant is having criminal history of one other case, which have been
BAIL No. 33953 of 2026
2

explained in the instant bail application and he is languishing in jail since
9.8.2026. It is also submitted that the applicant undertakes that he will not
misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake
of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any
early conclusion of trial.

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record,
evidence and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments
advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view
that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of
the trial.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.

Let applicant, Abu Uwaida be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following
conditions:-

(i). The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii). The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii). The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed,
unless personal presence is exempted.

(iv). The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of
which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is
suspected.

(v). The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as
to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police
officer or tamper with the evidence.

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the
BAIL No. 33953 of 2026
3

sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at
liberty to cancel the bail.

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts
brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and
the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case
during trial.

(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
September 30, 2026
Brijesh

Digitally signed by :-
BRIJESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…