Allahabad High Court
SALEEMversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Saleem, who is charged under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 61(2), 126(2), 115(2) and 351(3) of the BNS for alleged fraudulent execution of a sale deed. The applicant contended that the allegations are false, no consideration was received for the deed, and his criminal history of five other cases was fully explained. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual contentions. The Court noted that the offences are triable by a Magistrate with a maximum punishment of seven years and reiterated the settled principle that bail is the rule and its denial the exception unless guilt is proven. Accordingly, the Court granted bail on personal bond and two sureties, imposing standard conditions and clarifying that the order does not prejudice the trial merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted for offences triable by a Magistrate with a maximum punishment of seven years despite alleged fraud and prior criminal history
- Whether the presumption of innocence and the principle that bail is the rule applies in the present case
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 115(2), 126(2), 316(2), 318(4), 351(3), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- presumption of innocence
- fraud
- sale deed
- magistrate trial
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4852 of 2026
Saleem
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rupesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Sri Rupesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran
Khan, learned AGA for the State-respondent.
2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in
Case Crime No. 656 of 2025, under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 61(2), 126(2), 115(2)
and 351(3) of BNS, Police Station Quarsi, District Aligarh, during pendency of the
trial in the court below.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, as per allegation
applicant by playing fraud executed the sale deed in favour of the informant with
regard to the property for which he had already executed the sale deed earlier to some
other persons but entire allegation levelled against the applicant are totally false.
4. He further submitted that even no consideration has been received by applicant with
regard to the alleged sale deed executed by him and this fact is evident from his bank
statement which has been annexed alongwith the instant bail appliaction.
5. He 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.
6. He further submitted that all the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate
punishable with maximum punishment of seven years and in the present matter
applicant is in jail since 8.1.2026 i.e. for last four months.
7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the
arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
9. However, as per allegation applicant by playing fraud executed sale deed of a
property in favour of informant and apart from the present case applicant is also
BAIL No. 4852 of 2026
2
having criminal history of five other cases but all the alleged offences are triable by
Magistrate with maximum punishment of seven years.
10. Further, entire criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant
bail application and in the present matter applicant is in jail for last four months.
11. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be
innocent and bail is a rule while bail rejection is an exception.
12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in
my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant
bail application is allowed.
14. Let the applicant-Saleem, 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.
15. 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.
16. 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.
May 5, 2026
Ankita
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ANKITA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…