Allahabad High Court
KHURSHEDversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The court held that, given the nature of the injuries and the absence of evidence of a sharp‑edged weapon, the accused is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The accused, Khurshed, applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 196 of 2025) alleging assault with a sharp-edged weapon. He argued that the FIR filed on 21‑07‑2025 was false, that the injuries were caused by a blunt object, and that he has no prior criminal record. The State and the informant opposed bail, contending that the injury was dangerous to life and that the accused played the main role. The court examined the medical report, the nature of the injuries, and the alleged weapon, and concluded that the evidence did not support a serious offence warranting custody. Relying on recent Supreme Court bail jurisprudence, the court granted bail on personal bond and sureties, without addressing the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail despite the alleged assault with a sharp‑edged weapon
- Whether the FIR is false or frivolous and affects the bail decision
- Whether the nature of injuries and lack of criminal history justify release on bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 191(2), 191(3), 333, 351(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- false FIR
- assault
- injury
- Indian Penal Code
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37527 of 2025
Khurshed
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajendra Kumar Misra, Sudhir Kumar,
Vijay Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Shyam Shanker Pandey, Awadhesh
Kumar Mishra, G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri
S.S.Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for
State.
1A. Learned counsel for the applicant hands up the supplementary
affidavit annexing the additional document in support of the bail
application, the same is taken on record.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant/ accused-
Khurshed to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 196 of 2025, under
Sections 191(2), 191(3), 333, 109(1), 351(2) BNS, P.S.- Badalpur,
District- Gautam Budh Nagar, during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the belated FIR
has been lodged on 21.07.2025 by Sri Nasrat @ Nasir with the allegation
against six persons including the accused/applicant that on 19.07.2025 at
about 07:00 p.m. they have assaulted Jubair, the brother of informant by
the sharp edged weapon. It is the contention of learned counsel that false
and frivolous FIR has been lodged wherein all the five persons have been
granted bail except the accused/applicant as the main role has been
attributed to him. It is contended by learned counsel that injuries reported
to Jubair shows that the injuries were from hard and blunt object as no
sharp edged weapon has been used. The supplementary medico legal
BAIL No. 37527 of 2025
2
report does not contain any date which is from the private hospital,
wherein it is shown that a fracture of left parieto-temporal calvarium. The
applicant has no criminal history. The trial is at nascent stage. The
accused applicant is languishing in jail since 06.08.2025. He seeks to be
enlarged on bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. for State and learned counsel for the informant have
opposed the prayer for bail and submit that the accused/applicant has the
main role of assaulting the injured. The statement of the doctor is clear
and explicit that the injury sustained is dangerous to life. Hence submit
that the bail application be rejected.
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 alleged use of
weapon as no injury sustained by sharp edged weapon, 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.)
September 24, 2026
Abhishek Sri.
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…