Allahabad High Court

VIPIN VERMA @ VISHUversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 6 May 2026
Bench: RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA

Holding

The court held that, since the applicant did not cause any injury and had no criminal antecedents, he is entitled to bail despite the allegations.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Vipin Verma, accused under Sections 115(2), 109(1) and 3(5) of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly facilitating an assault that resulted in grievous injuries. The applicant claimed he merely called the victim to his shop and had no role in the shooting, while the prosecution argued he repeatedly called the victim and participated in the assault. The court noted that CCTV footage only placed the applicant at the scene and that he did not cause any injury, and that he had no prior criminal record. It distinguished his case from co‑accused Rahul and Aman, whose bail had been denied, and from Amit Panchal, whose bail was granted. Without passing on the merits, the court found the circumstances sufficient to grant bail with standard conditions.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant’s alleged act of calling the victim to the shop amounts to participation warranting denial of bail under IPC Sections 115(2), 109(1) and 3(5).
Whether the absence of criminal antecedents and the lack of direct involvement in causing injury justify granting bail.
Whether the bail decisions in the cases of co‑accused Rahul, Aman and Amit Panchal are binding or distinguishable.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 115(2), 3(5)

Subjects

bail
false implication
grievous injury
Indian Penal Code
criminal antecedents
high court
conditions of bail

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3854 of 2026

Vipin Verma @ Vishu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Diwan Saifullah Khan, Rajesh Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Martand Kumar

Court No. - 72
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Martand Kumar, Learned
counsel for the informant, 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.677 of 2025, under Sections 115(2),
109(1), 3(5) BNS, Police Station Loni Border, District Ghaziabad.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. The role assigned to the applicant is
of calling the victim to his shop, where the other accused persons were
supposedly waiting, and then the co-accused Rahul is said to have shot at
the injured, which resulted in grievous injuries being received by him.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that he is in jail since
23.11.2025, having no criminal antecedents.

4. Shri Martand Kumar, Learned counsel for the informant and the
Learned AGA have opposed the prayer for bail and have contended that
the applicant had repeatedly called up the injured and had joined with the
other accused persons in assaulting the injured. The injured to save his
own life ran from the spot, who was then shot by the co-accused Rahul.
Learned counsels have argued that multiple injuries were received by the
injured and there is an active participation of the applicant in the crime in
question. Learned AGA has not been able to point out any criminal
antecedents of the applicant. The bail application of the co-accused Rahul
BAIL No. 3854 of 2026
2

and Aman has been rejected by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No.6214/2026 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application
No.22176/2026, respectively.

5. I have considered the submissions made by Learned counsels for the
parties.

6. The applicant has not been assigned the role of causing of any grievous
injury to the injured. The applicant has been stated to have called up the
injured to his shop, where the other accused were supposedly lying in
wait. From the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties,
it appears that there is some CCTV footage, which shows the presence of
the applicant however, the Learned counsels for the informant and the
Learned AGA have not been able to dispute the contention of the
applicant that the applicant has not caused any injury to the injured. The
co-accused Amit Panchal has been granted bail by this Court in Bail
Application No.44900/2025 by the order dated 08.01.2026. Although the
bail application of the co-accused Rahul has been rejected by this Court,
however, from a consideration of the entire facts and circumstances as are
appearing from the record, the case of the applicant is distinguishable
from that of the co-accused Rahul and Aman. The applicant is not stated
to have any criminal antecedents.

7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it
appropriate to enlarge the applicant on bail.

8. The bail application is allowed.

9. Let the accused-applicant, Vipin Verma @ Vishu, involved in above
mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a
personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

(ii) The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

(iii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses
BAIL No. 3854 of 2026
3

and co-operate in the trial.

(iv) The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by
the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted by the court
concerned.

10. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court
concerned will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. The observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the
instant bail application and are not to be considered to be an opinion on
the merits of the case.

(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
May 7, 2026
A. Pandey

Digitally signed by :-
ANAND PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…