Allahabad High Court
RITIKversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Ritik, who is charged with assault by firearm under Sections 109(1) and 115(2) of the same statute and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, had been in custody since 16 June 2025, and pointed out that co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State argued that the victim suffered a permanent loss of his right eye due to a gunshot wound, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence. After reviewing the nature of the injury, the pendency of the trial, and the lack of danger to life, the court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, concluded that the case was suitable for bail. Consequently, the court ordered the release of the applicant on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged with assault by firearm causing permanent loss of an eye
- Whether the injury sustained by the victim constitutes danger to life for bail considerations
- Whether the applicant's prolonged pre‑trial detention and the pendency of the trial justify granting bail
- Whether the conditions imposed on bail are sufficient to safeguard the trial process
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25, 27, 3
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 351, 483
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- injury
- false implication
- court conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34912 of 2025
Ritik
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manish Kumar Singh, Viveka Nand Maurya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Manish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.P. Maurya,
learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on
bail in Case Crime No. 170 of 2025 under Sections 109(1), 115(2) BNS and sections
3/25/27 Arms Act, registered at Police Station Binauli, District Baghpat during
pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 16.6.2025. It is
further submitted that co-accused Saurabh and Nitish have already been granted bail
by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 20.8.2025 and 19.9.2025 passed
in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 26264 of 2025 and 29574 of 2025
respectively. It is further submitted that though the applicant has been assigned
specific role of assault by fire arm, the injured has not received any injury which is
dangerous to life. 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.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
applicant and submits that the injured has received gunshot injury on his right eye as a
result of which, he is deprived of his right eye permanently.
5. Applicant has been assigned specific role of assault by fire arm as a result of which,
the injured has received gunshot injury on his right eye and he has lost his right eye
permanently, however the said injury has not been found to be dangerous to life. The
applicant is in jail since 16.6.2025.
6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record
BAIL No. 34912 of 2025
2
and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for
bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED.
7. Let the applicant Ritik involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on
his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) 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.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates
fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement
under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any
adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial
court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either
personally or through his counsel.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression
on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in
this order.
April 23, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…