Allahabad High Court
SURAJ TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The court held that the lack of a medico‑legal report and the filing of the charge sheet entitled the accused to bail.
Summary
Suraj Tiwari applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 185 of 2026) involving alleged assault with a knife under several sections of the BNS. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated due to village politics and argued that the medico‑legal report did not corroborate the injuries alleged in the FIR. The State, through the informant, contended that the injuries to the victims were grievous and that the applicant’s role was clear from their statements. The court noted that the injuries were unreported, the charge sheet had been filed, and the Supreme Court’s recent bail guidelines were applicable. Without addressing the merits of the case, the court granted bail on the condition of a personal bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail despite allegations of grievous assault under sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 118(1), and 109(1) of the BNS.
- Whether the absence of a contemporaneous medico‑legal report and the unreported nature of injuries justify granting bail.
- Whether the filing of the charge sheet and the Supreme Court’s bail policy in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3), 352
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- medico‑legal report
- grievous injuries
- Supreme Court bail policy
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34077 of 2026
Suraj Tiwari
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shri Prakash Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Sri Shriprakash Dwivedi, learned counsel for applicant hands up
supplementary affidavit enclosing the additional documents in support of
bail application, the same is taken on record. Sri Gaurav Pratap Singh,
learned counsel for the informant hands up Vakalatnama, the same is
taken on record.
1A. Heard Sri Dwivedi, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri Singh,
learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Suraj Tiwari to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 185 of 2026,
under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 118(1), 109(1) of BNS, P.S.-
Vindhyachal, District- Mirzapur, 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 02.07.2026 lodged by
Ravindra Singh uncle of two injured namely Anil and Shubham. It is
alleged in the FIR that four persons including the accused applicant had
assaulted the injured with sharp edged weapon knife. It is the further
alleged that it was due to the dispute of passage, which was the point of
contention between the two. It is contended by learned counsel that the
medico legal examination report does not corroborates the incident. The
injuries were stated to be suffered on 02.07.2026 but there was no medico
legal examination report of the injured of the same date who are
subsequently being treated in different hospitals. The injury report of
BAIL No. 34077 of 2026
2
Shubham Singh shows the opinion of doctor that no specific interpretation
of the injuries could be made. There are six injuries reported all are
stitched wound. It is the contention of learned counsel that there is no
complicity of accused applicant in the present incident. The applicant has
been falsely implicated due to the village politics and animosity. There is
no recovery. The accused applicant has criminal history of two cases
wherein he is on bail. Charge sheet is submitted. The accused applicant is
languishing in jail since 05.07.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on
bail.
4. Learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A. for State have
opposed the bail application and submit that there is grievous injuries on
the persons of injured Anil and Shubham, which are fractures and
grievous in nature. The statement of the injured is clear and explicit which
shows the role of the accused applicant. Hence, the bail application be
rejected.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering the unreported nature of injuries and the charge sheet is
submitted, 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 24, 2026
Sharad/-
Digitally signed by :-
SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…