Allahabad High Court
SHIVAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
Bail was granted to the applicant on the ground of parity with the co‑accused.
Summary
Shivam, accused in Crime No.516 of 2026 for offences under the Indian Penal Code, the B.N.S. Act and Sections 5/6 of the POCSO Act, sought bail during the pendency of trial. He argued that a co‑accused, Ravi, with an identical role and no prior criminal record, had been granted bail, establishing parity. The State opposed the bail, but did not dispute the parity claim. Citing the precedent of Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha v. State of U.P. (1993) and Supreme Court decisions in Paras Ram Vishnoi v. Director, CBI (2021) and Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022), the Court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail. Accordingly, bail was granted on the condition of a personal bond, two sureties, and compliance with standard bail conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused during trial for the alleged offences.
- Whether the grant of bail to a co‑accused on identical charges creates a binding parity principle for the applicant.
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 70(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 123, 137(2), 333, 351(3), 352
- POCSO Act — s. 5, 6
Subjects
- bail
- parity
- criminal procedure
- POCSO Act
- Indian Penal Code
- high court
- bail conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4251 of 2026
Shivam
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Deepak Kumar Srivastava, Deepanshi
Srivastava, Devendra Mani Tripathi,
Manjeet Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Harish Chandra, Shweta Singh
Court No. - 65
(Sr. No.266 out of 266)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Leaned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the
informant has been served on 02.02.2026.
2. Heard Sri Devendra Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms.
Shweta Singh, learned counsel for High Court Legal Service Committee, Sri
V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed
on record. Learned counsel for the informant is not present.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.516 of 2026, under Sections
137(2), 123, 333, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 70(2) B.N.S., and Section 5/6 POCSO
Act, Police Station Bhojpur, District Moradabad, during the pendency of
trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the Criminal Misc. Short
Term Bail (Parole) Application No.4 of 2026 may be dismissed as not
pressed.
5. The same is dismissed as not pressed.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that similarly placed co-
accused, Ravi, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated
25.03.2026 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6497 of 2026, hence, the
applicant, having an identical role and no criminal history, is entitled to bail
BAIL No. 4251 of 2026
2
on parity. He is in jail since 20.11.2025 and will not misuse the liberty of
bail.
7. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.
However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not
been disputed by him.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in light of the
judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of
U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgements passed by the Supreme Court in
Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation,
MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central
Bureau of Investigation and Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, the Court is of the
view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is
allowed on the ground of parity.
9. Let the applicant- Shivam, be released on bail on furnishing a personal
bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to
verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not tamper with
evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as
required.
10. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The
observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
April 9, 2026
(Ravi Kant)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…