Allahabad High Court
ANKITversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The bail application is allowed.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for the accused Ankit who faces charges under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 316(2) of the same Act and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act. The applicant claimed innocence, argued that the injuries inflicted on the victim were not life‑threatening, and highlighted the long pendency of the trial. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the assault with a sharp‑edged weapon and the applicant’s criminal history. After reviewing the record, the Court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, found the case suitable for bail and ordered release on a personal bond with two sureties and several conditions to prevent tampering or intimidation of witnesses. The order expressly limited its effect to the bail application and did not prejudice the trial court’s independent assessment of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita despite the nature of the offences charged.
- Whether the non‑dangerous nature of the injuries and the pendency of the trial justify granting bail.
- Whether the applicant’s prior criminal history precludes bail.
- Whether imposing conditions can sufficiently safeguard against witness tampering and evidence interference.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25, 4
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 316(2), 351(3), 352, 483
Subjects
- bail
- Section 483 BNS
- assault with sharp‑edged weapon
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
- non‑dangerous injury
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42004 of 2025
Ankit
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhai Kumar Singh, Vikas Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anurag Kumar Pandey, G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri A.K. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
B.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and Sri Gyan
Dhar Dubey, learned counsel for the first informant and perused
the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of
applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.
324 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 316(2)
BNS and Section 4/25 Arms Act, registered at Police Station
Partapur, District Meerut, during pendency of the trial.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that
applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this
case and he has been languishing in jail since 6.8.2025. It is
further submitted that the though the applicant has been assigned
specific role of assault by sharp edged weapon on the injured
Shubham and the injured Shubham has received injury on his
shoulder and waist and the said injuries have not been found to be
dangerous to life. It is further submitted that applicant is having
criminal history which has been duly explained in the memo of
application. It is also submitted that the applicant undertakes that
he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed
out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there
BAIL No. 42004 of 2025
2
is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant and
learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
applicant and it is submitted that the applicant has assaulted the
injured by sharp edged weapon as a result of which the injured has
received injury on his shoulder.
5. The applicant has been assigned specific role of assault by
sharp edged weapon on the injured Shubham and the injured
Shubham is said to have received injury on his shoulder and waist,
however, the said injuries have not been found to be dangerous to
life. The applicant is having criminal history which has been duly
explained in the memo of application.
6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence
reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits
of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail
application is ALLOWED.
7. Let the applicant- Ankit involved in the aforesaid case crime be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/-
with 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 not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial
court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of
charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of
B.N.S.S.
BAIL No. 42004 of 2025
3
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall
not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the
witnesses are present in the trial court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each
date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.
9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the
purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way
be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial
court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent
conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything
said in this order.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
May 6, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…