Allahabad High Court
ELIAS AHMEDversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
Considering the victim’s voluntary statement and lack of criminal history, the court held that the accused is entitled to bail.
Summary
Elias Ahmed applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 0140 of 2026) filed under Section 87 BNS after being arrested on 14 April 2026. He contended that the FIR, lodged by the victim’s uncle, was false and that the victim’s statement under Section 180 BNSS showed she voluntarily left her uncle’s home and had no involvement with the accused. The State opposed the bail, but the court examined the victim’s statement and the absence of any prior criminal record. Relying on the Supreme Court’s recent bail guidelines in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, the court concluded that the applicant was entitled to bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed, subject to a personal bond and two sureties of equal amount.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail pending trial despite the FIR under Section 87 BNS.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 180 BNSS negates the basis for denying bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 180
- Indian Penal Code — s. 87
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- victim statement
- Section 87
- Section 180
- Supreme Court bail jurisprudence
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35084 of 2026
Elias Ahmed
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manu Khare
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Manu Khare, learned counsel for accused applicant and
learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Elias Ahmed to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 0140 of 2026,
under Section 87 BNS, P.S.- Beta-2, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar,
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 22.04.2026 lodged by
uncle of the victim for enticement. In the statement of victim recorded
under Section 180 BNSS, she specifically stated that she know the
accused applicant and has left her uncle's home on her own. The accused
applicant has not committed any wrong act with her. The applicant has no
criminal history. Charge sheet is submitted. The accused applicant is
languishing in jail since 14.04.2026. 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 statement of victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS,
the accused/applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
BAIL No. 35084 of 2026
2
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.)
October 1, 2026
Sharad/-
Digitally signed by :-
SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…