Allahabad High Court

SABHAJEET MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 22 April 2026
Bench: SAMEER JAIN

Holding

Considering the absence of evidence that the allegedly obtained signed paper was ever used, the fact that co-accused Akhilesh Dubey is the principal accused, the applicant's clean criminal record and custody of over six months, and the presumption of innocence, the applicant is entitled to bail as bail cannot be denied for punitive or preventive purposes.

Summary

The applicant Sabhajeet Mishra, a police Sub Inspector, filed a bail application in Case Crime No. 126 of 2025 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 447, 506, 452, 384, 307, 34 and 120B IPC, Police Station Gwaltoli, District Kanpur Nagar. The allegation against him was that he, along with co-accused Shivansh @ Pappu, threatened the informant and obtained his signature on blank paper at the behest of co-accused Akhilesh Dubey, who was the principal accused in a waqf property fraud. The applicant contended that the allegations were false, that there was no evidence the signed paper was ever used, that he had no criminal history, and that he had been in jail since 13.9.2025. The State and informant opposed bail, alleging he was an active member of Akhilesh Dubey's gang, but they could not dispute the absence of evidence of misuse, that Akhilesh Dubey was the prime accused, or that the applicant was a public servant with no criminal history and over six months in custody. The Court noted that the only allegation against the applicant was threatening the informant and obtaining his signature on blank paper, with no evidence that the paper was ever used. It also observed that co-accused Akhilesh Dubey appeared to be the principal accused, the applicant had no other criminal history, and he had been in jail for more than six months. Relying on the presumption of innocence and the principle that bail should not be denied for punitive or preventive purposes, the Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail. The bail application was allowed with conditions, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant, a police Sub Inspector, is entitled to be released on bail in the alleged offences.
Whether the allegation of threatening the informant and obtaining his signature on blank paper, without evidence of its misuse, justifies continued detention.
Whether the fact that co-accused Akhilesh Dubey is the principal accused and the applicant has no criminal history and has been in custody for over six months are relevant considerations for bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 307, 34, 384, 420, 447, 452, 467, 468, 471, 506

Subjects

Bail
Criminal Law
Indian Penal Code
Cheating
Forgery
Criminal Conspiracy
Criminal Intimidation
Public Servant
Presumption of Innocence
No Criminal History
Custody
Misuse of Signed Paper

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41111 of 2025

Sabhajeet Mishra
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Swati Agrawal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : A.Z.Khan, G.A.

Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. Heard Ms. Swati Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri A. Z. Khan,
learned counsel for the informant and Sri Prateek Saxena, learned AGA for the State-
respondent.

2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in
Case Crime No. 126 of 2025, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 447, 506, 452, 384,
307, 34, 120B IPC, Police Station Gwaltoli, District Kanpur Nagar, during pendency
of the trial in the court below.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is police Sub Inspector
and only allegation against him is that he threatened the informant alongwith co-
accused Shivansh @ Pappu and obtained his signature on blank paper.

4. She further submitted that even from the FIR it reflects co-accused Akhilesh Dubey
was principal accused who allegedly possessed the waqf property by fraud.

5. She further submitted that entire allegation levelled against the applicant are totally
false and even there is no evidence that either applicant or any other accused including
principal accused Akhilesh Dubey ever used the alleged signed paper of the informant.

6. She further argued that applicant is a responsible public servant and apart from the
present case he is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail
since 13.9.2025 i.e. for last more than six months.

7. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer
for bail and submitted that applicant is an active member of the gang of co-accused
Akhilesh Dubey and on his behest he used to threaten the informant but they could not
dispute the fact that there is no evidence that signed paper allegedly obtained by
applicant and co-accused was ever used by any one.

8. They further could not dispute the fact that co-accused Akhilesh Dubey appears to
be prime accused.
BAIL No. 41111 of 2025
2

9. They also could not dispute the fact that applicant is a public servant and except this
case he is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail for last
more than six months.

10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

11. Applicant is police sub inspector and only allegation against him is that he
threatened the informant and obtained his sign on blank paper alongwith co-accused
Pappu on behest of co-accused Akhilesh Dubey.

12. Further, even there is no evidence that either applicant or any co-accused used the
alleged sign paper of informant.

13. Further even from the entire material available on record, it reflects, co accused
Akhilesh is principal accused.

14. Further, except the present case, it appears applicant has no other criminal history
to his credit and in the present matter he is in jail since September, 2025 i.e for last
more than six months.

15. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be
innocent and bail application should not be dismissed either for punitive or preventive
purpose.

16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in
my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant
bail application is allowed.

18. Let the applicant-Sabhajeet Mishra, 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 the court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his
personal presence is exempted.

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

19. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty
to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

20. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in
BAIL No. 41111 of 2025
3

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.

April 23, 2026
Ankita
(Sameer Jain,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
ANKITA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…