Allahabad High Court
VIJAY SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The court held that, given the unexplained FIR and medico‑legal delays, minor injuries, and a pending civil dispute, the accused is entitled to bail.
Summary
Vijay Singh applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 591 of 2026) alleging false implication in an FIR filed by the victim on 2 August 2026 for assault. The applicant argued that the FIR and medico‑legal report were unduly delayed, the injuries were minor, and a civil dispute existed between him and the victim's father. The State opposed bail, but the court noted the unexplained delays, the nature of injuries, and the pending civil dispute as factors favoring release. Relying on Supreme Court precedents on bail policy, the court granted bail without addressing the merits of the underlying offence. The applicant was ordered to furnish a personal bond and two sureties and to cooperate with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether the unexplained delay in filing the FIR and conducting the medico‑legal examination warrants the grant of bail.
- Whether the minor nature of injuries and the existence of a civil dispute affect the bail decision.
- Whether the applicant's prior criminal history impacts the bail application.
- Whether bail can be granted pending trial for the offences alleged under the IPC and CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 115(2), 127(2), 140(3), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- FIR delay
- medico‑legal report
- civil dispute
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Supreme Court bail precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34070 of 2026
Vijay Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Noor Muhammad, Yogesh Kumar
Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vijay Tripathi
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Sri Yogesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant hands
up the supplementary affidavit explaining the criminal history. The same
is taken on record.
1A. Heard Sri Srivastava, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri Vijay
Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Vijay Singh to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 591 of 2026, under
Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 127(2), 140(3), 109(1) BNS, P.S.-
Shikohabad, District- Firozabad, 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 02.08.2026 lodged by
the victim herself with the allegation that on 01.08.2026 at about 8:30
a.m. that victim while going for stitching, has been surrounded by three
accused persons including the applicant, who had abducted and beaten
her. It is further contended that there is a civil dispute pending between
the accused applicant and father of the victim. The FIR is delayed without
any explanation. The medico legal examination report has been carried
out on 07.08.2026 without any explanation as to the delay in getting the
medico legal examination done. Further submits that in the statement
under Section 183 BNSS, it is specifically stated that there is no offence
of rape and it is only the assault, which has been made. It is further
BAIL No. 34070 of 2026
2
contended that injuries are simple in nature. The applicant has criminal
history of two cases wherein he has not been charge sheeted. The
investigation is continuing. He is cooperating in the investigation. The
accused applicant is languishing in jail since 20.08.2026. 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 nature of injuries, the civil dispute pending between
the co-accused and the father of victim and prima facie unexplained delay
of FIR and medico legal report 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)10 SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and
speedy disposal.
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
October 1, 2026
Shivangi
Digitally signed by :-
SHIVANGI YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…