Allahabad High Court

FARMANversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: VIVEK VARMA

Holding

The applicant is entitled to bail subject to standard conditions.

Summary

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Farman in criminal case No. 179 of 2026, alleged under IPC Section 105 and CrPC Section 223(2). The applicant asserted that he was falsely implicated, there was no prior enmity with the deceased, and the allegations were vague with no corroborative evidence. The State opposed bail but could not refute these submissions. The Court noted that a co‑accused, Mehshar, had already been granted bail, the applicant had no criminal record, and there was no reasonable apprehension of evidence tampering or witness intimidation. Consequently, the Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions of appearance, non‑tampering, and non‑pressurisation of witnesses. The bail was ordered to be granted.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 223(2) of the CrPC given the lack of substantive evidence and no prior enmity.
Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.
Whether parity with the co‑accused who was previously granted bail warrants granting bail to the applicant.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 223(2)
Indian Penal Code — s. 105

Subjects

bail
false implication
lack of evidence
no prior enmity
sureties
CrPC
IPC
trial delay

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34727 of 2026

Farman
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Saurabh Tripathi, Shadab Alam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anupam Anand, learned
Brief Holder for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on
record.

2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 179 of 2026, under Section 105, 223(2)
B.N.S., Police Station- Baniather, District- Sambhal, during the pendency of
trial.

3. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present case. There was no prior enmity between the
applicant and the deceased. The incident in question is purely accidental in
nature. The applicant neither possessed the requisite knowledge nor any
intention for committing the alleged offence. Vague and general allegations
have been levelled against the applicant. At this stage, there is no
corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Identically
placed co-accused Mehshar has already been granted bail by this Court vide
order dated 28.09.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34538
of 2026. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 27.8.2026
having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not
misuse the said liberty.

4. Learned Brief Holder for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but
could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this
Court prima facie finds that there was no prior enmity between the parties.
BAIL No. 34727 of 2026
2

Vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicant. At
this stage, there is no credible evidence to establish that the applicant had the
requisite knowledge or intention to commit the alleged offence. Co-accused
Mehshar has already been granted bail by this Court. Moreover, the
applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more
than a month and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when
no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the
applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay
the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the
case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

6. Let the applicant Farman, involved in the aforesaid case be released on
bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions
that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

September 29, 2026
Abhishek
(Vivek Varma, J.)

Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…