Allahabad High Court
PARVEZversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- JAI PRAKASH TIWARI
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail as there is no substantive evidence linking him to the offence and no risk of tampering or intimidation has been shown.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Parvez, accused in Crime No. 423 of 2025 under Sections 303(2) and 317(2) of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant claimed the allegations were false and based solely on suspicion, and highlighted that he had previously been granted bail in five other cases. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the applicant's factual contentions. The Court observed that no substantive evidence linked the applicant to the offence, that he had already been in custody for about nine months, and that the State had not shown any risk of evidence tampering, witness intimidation, or trial delay. Consequently, the Court granted bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions to appear in court, not tamper with evidence, and not pressurize witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the accusation is based only on suspicion and lacks substantive evidence
- Whether the applicant's prior criminal history precludes bail
- Whether there is a reasonable apprehension of evidence tampering, witness intimidation, or trial delay
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 303(2), 317(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- suspicion
- evidence tampering
- witness intimidation
- Section 303
- Section 317
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39126 of 2025
Parvez
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Irfan, Pradeep Saxena, Ram
Naresh Maurya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
Heard Sri Mohd. Irfan, learned counsel for the applicant and learned
AGA for the State-respondent.
The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on
bail in Case Crime No. 423 of 2025, under Sections 303(2), 317(2) BNS,
2023, Police Station Meerganj, District Bareilly, during pendency of the
trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the basis of false
allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the
basis of suspicion and the entire allegation levelled against the applicant
is totally false and he is innocent. Learned counsel further submitted that
however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history
of five other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the
instant bail application in para '9', in which, the applicant has already been
released in all the cases on bail. Applicant is in jail in the present matter
since 07.08.2025.
Per contra, learned AGA, however, opposed the prayer for bail but could
not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the
applicant.
Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this
Court prima facie finds that a vague and general role has been assigned to
the applicant and applicant has been implicated in the present case on the
basis of suspicion, as per argument of the learned counsel for the
applicant. At this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the
applicant with the offence. Further, the applicant has remained confined
for approximately nine months and there is no hope of early conclusion of
trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the
fore by the State that the applicants, if enlarged on bail, would either
BAIL No. 39126 of 2025
2
tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness,
without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the
applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Bail Application is allowed.
Let the applicant-Parvej, involved in the aforesaid case crime be
released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the
conditions that he:
(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;
(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts
brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and
the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case
during trial.
(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
May 5, 2026
Brijesh
Digitally signed by :-
BRIJESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…