Allahabad High Court
KAMLESHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The court held that the accused is entitled to bail because of the minor nature of injuries, the pending civil dispute, and the unexplained delays in filing the FIR and conducting the medico‑legal examination.
Summary
The accused Kamlesh applied for bail in a criminal case involving sections of the IPC and CrPC, alleging false implication in an FIR filed by the victim alleging assault. He argued that the FIR and medico‑legal report were unduly delayed, the injuries were minor, and a civil dispute existed between him and the victim's father. The State opposed the bail. The court examined the nature of the injuries, the unexplained delays, and the civil dispute, and, without addressing the merits of the offence, decided the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, bail was granted on personal bond and sureties, referencing Supreme Court guidelines. The court directed the accused to cooperate for a speedy trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted given the minor injuries, civil dispute, and unexplained delays in FIR and medico‑legal report.
- Whether the accused's claim of false implication affects the bail decision.
- Application of Supreme Court bail principles from Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 183
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 115(2), 127(2), 140(3), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Indian Penal Code
- delay in FIR
- medico‑legal report
- civil dispute
- false implication
- Supreme Court bail jurisprudence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35099 of 2026
Kamlesh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Noor Muhammad, Yogesh Kumar
Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Yogesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for accused
applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Kamlesh to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 591 of 2026, under
Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 127(2), 140(3), 109(1) BNS, P.S.- Shikohabad,
District- Firozabad, 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 02.08.2026 lodged by the
victim herself with the allegation that on 01.08.2026 at about 8:30 a.m. that
victim while going for stitching, has been surrounded by three accused
persons including the applicant, who had abducted and beaten her. It is
further contended that there is a civil dispute pending between the accused
applicant and father of the victim. The FIR is delayed without any
explanation. The medico legal examination report has been carried out on
07.08.2026 without any explanation as to the delay in getting the medico
legal examination done. Further submits that in the statement under Section
183 BNSS, it is specifically stated that there is no offence of rape and it is
only the assault, which has been made. It is further contended that injuries
are simple in nature. The applicant has no criminal history. Charge sheet is
submitted. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 20.08.2026. He
seeks enlargement of accused on bail.
BAIL No. 35099 of 2026
2
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 of injuries, the civil dispute pending between the
accused applicant and the father of victim and prima facie unexplained delay
of FIR and medico legal report, 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…