Allahabad High Court
TASNEEM @ TASLEEMversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the arms offences.
Summary
The applicant, Tasneem @ Tasleem, applied for bail in an arms‑related case (Crime No. 111 of 2026) involving alleged violations of Sections 3, 5, 9, 25, 29 and 26(2) of the Arms Act. The applicant was not named in the FIR; his alleged involvement rested mainly on a confessional statement of a co‑accused. The court noted his six prior criminal cases and the period of incarceration already served. Weighing the nature of the offence, the severity of punishment, and the fact that the primary evidence was a co‑accused’s confession, the court found the case fit for bail. Consequently, bail was granted on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of non‑tampering with evidence, non‑intimidation of witnesses, and appearance before the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in offences punishable under Sections 3, 5, 9, 25, 29 and 26(2) of the Arms Act.
- Whether reliance on a co‑accused’s confessional statement suffices to deny bail.
- Impact of the applicant’s prior criminal antecedents on the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25, 26(2), 29, 3, 5, 9
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- co‑accused confession
- criminal antecedents
- trial pending
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34072 of 2026
Tasneem @ Tasleem
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amar Nath
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 06 out of 109)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel
for the applicant is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Amar Nath, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajendra Prasad
Singh, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 111 of 2026, under Sections 3/5/9/25/29
& 26(2) of Arms Act, Police Station - Khalapar, District - Muzaffarnagar, during the
pendency of trial.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties, nature of offence, severity of punishment and also considering
the fact that the applicant is not named in the FIR, his implication rests primarily on
the confessional statement of a co-accused, alongside his criminal antecedents of six
cases stands properly explained and the period of incarceration already undergone,
this Court prima facie finds it a fit case to release the applicant on bail.
5. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Tasneem @
Tasleem, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the
satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the
conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall
appear before the trial court as required.
6. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein
shall not affect the trial on merits.
September 24, 2026
Siddhant
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHANT SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…