Allahabad High Court
ANOOP PALversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the accused without touching the merits of the case.
Summary
Anoop Pal applied for bail in Crime No. 674 of 2026, charged under several sections of the BNS and the Arms Act, alleging false implication in an FIR dated 21.07.2026 concerning a hotel altercation that resulted in minor injuries. The applicant argued that no weapon was identified, witness statements had improved, and he had no prior summons in four other cases while cooperating with the investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court, noting the nature and number of injuries and the improvement in prosecution witness statements, decided the applicant was entitled to bail without addressing the merits of the case. Bail was granted on condition of a personal bond and two sureties, referencing Supreme Court dicta in Girish Gandhi v. State of UP and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re. The applicant was directed to cooperate for a speedy disposal of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused given the charges under the BNS and Arms Act.
- Whether the improvement in prosecution witness statements and lack of weapon evidence justify bail.
- Whether the accused poses a risk of fleeing or tampering with evidence.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- assault
- Arms Act
- witness statement improvement
- personal bond
- sureties
- Supreme Court bail policy
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35092 of 2026
Anoop Pal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Surat Patel
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Sri Ram Surat Patel, learned counsel for applicant hands up
supplementary affidavit, the same is taken on record.
1A. Heard Sri Patel, learned counsel for accused applicant and learned
A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Anoop Pal to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 674 of 2026, under
Sections 191(2), 352, 351(3), 109(1), 324(4) of BNS and Section 9/25
Arms Act, P.S.- Izzat Nagar, District- Bareilly, 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 21.07.2026 lodged by
Piyush Gangwar against four named and 4-5 anonymous persons with the
allegation that the accused persons had taken the room in a hotel of
informant and started making noise. On raising objection, the accused
persons had assaulted the informant, who is owner of the hotel. Two staff
of the hotel namely Pankaj and Anuj sustained injuries. The injury of
Piyush and Anuj have been examined and as per medico legal report, both
suffered injuries simple in nature. The injury of Pankaj has not been
examined. It is further submits that no weapon is shown in the FIR and
later on it is stated that accused persons had used butt of the country made
pistol. It is also shown that one of the accused has opened fire. It is further
contended that there is marked improvement in the statement of
BAIL No. 35092 of 2026
2
prosecution witnesses. The applicant has criminal history of four cases
wherein all cases, the accused applicant has not been summoned.
Investigation is continuing and applicant is co-operating in the
investigation. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since
28.07.2026. 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 nature and number of injuries and apparent
improvement in the statement of prosecution witnesses, 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.)
October 1, 2026
Sharad/-
Digitally signed by :-
SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…