Allahabad High Court

MOHD AYUBversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 26 April 2026
Disposal: Disposed off/Decided on merits
Bench: ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL

Holding

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Mohd Ayub, who is charged under Sections 74, 64(1), 351(3), 103(1) BNS of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67 of the Income Tax Act in Crime No. 76 of 2025. The applicant claimed that his wife died accidentally in the bathroom and denied any rape, noting that the FIR was lodged 76 days after the incident and that the police later deleted the charge under Section 103 BNS. The prosecution could not produce incriminating material linking the applicant to murder or rape. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (Kapil Wadhawan vs CBI, Maya Tiwari vs State of U.P.) and the policy for grant of bail, the court held that the applicant was entitled to bail. The court ordered his release on bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and standard conditions to prevent tampering with evidence or further offences.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to an accused facing serious offences including alleged rape and murder pending trial
Whether the delay in filing the FIR and lack of incriminating material justify granting bail
Effect of the deletion of the charge under Section 103 BNS on the bail decision
Application of Supreme Court bail guidelines and policy directives in the present case

Legislation cited

Income Tax Act — s. 67
Indian Penal Code — s. 103(1) BNS, 351(3), 64(1), 74

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
delay in FIR
rape
murder
Indian Penal Code
Income Tax Act
Supreme Court guidelines
overcrowded jails

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37781 of 2025

Mohd Ayub
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Kumar Yadav, Ashok Kumar Maurya,
Rajeev Kumar Singh, Saurabh Shahi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 67
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant,
Sri Anurag Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the
record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release
the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.76 of 2025, under Sections-
74, 64(1), 351(3), 103(1) BNS and Section 67 I.T. Act, Police Station-
Ghosi, District-Mau, during the pendency of the trial.

3. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the
deceased accidentally fell in the bathroom and suffered injuries.
Therefore, the applicant, being the husband of the deceased,
admitted her to the hospital, where she succumbed to her injuries.
The present FIR was lodged on 11.02.2025, which is after 76 days,
though the allegation has been made by the first informant regarding
the commission of rape upon her. However, the applicant had
established a relationship with the first informant with her consent;
therefore, no case of rape is made out. It is further submitted that
after registering the FIR, the body of the deceased was exhumed and
a postmortem was conducted, but the cause of death could not be
ascertained. There is no incriminating material against the applicant
to show that he had murdered his wife or forcibly raped the first
informant, who is the sister-in-law. Even the lodging of the FIR after
76 days itself casts doubt over the entire prosecution story. It is
further submitted that the police, after investigation, deleted Section
103 BNS. However, at the time of framing of charges, a charge was
framed under Section 103 BNS, despite the fact that there is no
incriminating material against the applicant. The applicant is a law
BAIL No. 37781 of 2025
2

abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 16.02.2025. In case,
he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would
cooperate in the trial proceedings.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view
the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking
into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases
before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the
judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs
Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC
3038 as well as guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs.
State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant
of bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I
am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

6. Let the applicant- Mohd Ayub, involved in the aforementioned
crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and 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 cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely
without seeking any adjournment.

iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or
commission of any crime after being released on bail.

iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the
bond executed by him.

7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.

8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
BAIL No. 37781 of 2025
3

9. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as
well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.

10. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis
of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the
official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned
counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within
15 days.

11. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order
to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System
(BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant.

12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant
through concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal
within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the
case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ
Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in
(2024) 10 SCC 685.

April 27, 2026
S.C.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM CHAURASIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…