Allahabad High Court
SONUversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court granted bail to the applicant, subject to conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sonu, who had been in custody since 6 February 2025 in connection with Crime No.30 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 117(3) of the B.N.S. The applicant claimed false implication, arguing that the alleged injury to the victim was not life‑threatening, while the prosecution, represented by the informant's counsel, asserted that the assault caused loss of vision in one eye. The court noted that the trial was still pending, statements of two witnesses had been recorded and a third witness was about to be examined, and that the injury, though serious, did not involve repeated blows. Weighing the fact that the applicant had been detained for several months without a concluded trial, the judge found no compelling reason to keep him in custody. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to a personal bond, two sureties and conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence, intimidation of witnesses, and criminal activity. The order also directed procedural steps for the applicant's release via the Bail Order Management System.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite the alleged assault causing loss of vision in one eye.
- Whether the pending trial and the nature of the evidence justify continued detention.
- Whether the applicant's claim of false implication affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 117(3), 351(3), 352
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- assault
- injury
- pending trial
- court conditions
- personal bond
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45529 of 2025
Sonu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rahul Kumar Pal, Rahul Saxena
Court No. - 72
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rahul Saxena, the
Learned counsel for the informant, the 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.30 of 2025, under Sections 115(2),
352, 351(3), 117(3) of B.N.S., Police Station- Kithore, District- Meerut.
3. Supplementary affidavit filed by the Learned counsel for the applicant
today in Court, is taken on the record.
4. The Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case. Although, specific role of
causing injury to the injured has been assigned to the applicant, however,
the injured has not received any life threatening injuries. The applicant is
in jail since 06.02.2025 and till date trial against the applicant has not
concluded.
5. Sri Rahul Saxena, the Learned counsel for the informant, on the other
hand, has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and has contended that due
to the assault made by the applicant, the injured has lost vision in one eye.
The injured and the informant have supported the prosecution version in
their statements before the Court concerned and no ground for bail is
made out against the applicant and the same is liable to be rejected.
BAIL No. 45529 of 2025
2
6. The Learned A.G.A. has also supported the contentions raised by the
Learned counsel for the informant.
7. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for
the parties and perused the record.
8. The applicant is stated to be in jail since 6.02.2025. The trial against the
applicant is pending consideration before the concerned Court. Statement
of P.W.-1 and P.W.-2 is stated to have been recorded. Presently, the
summons are being issued for recording the statement of P.W.-3. This
Court has been informed that the first informant and the injured witness
Yash have been examined before the trial Court. The injured in his
statement recorded before the police has although assigned the role of
using a sharp edged weapon to the injured on the eye, however, no
repeated blow has been attributed to the applicant.
9. Taking into account the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the
period of detention of the applicant as also the fact that the injured
witness has now been examined before the trial Court, I deem it fit to
enlarge the applicant on bail.
10. The bail application is allowed.
11. Let the accused-applicant- Sonu, 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
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.
BAIL No. 45529 of 2025
3
12. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court
below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.
13. 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.
14. 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.
15. 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 18, 2026
Sachin
Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…