Allahabad High Court

MUNSARIFversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 4 May 2026
Bench: SAMEER JAIN

Holding

The applicant is entitled to bail as the offences are bailable and the prosecution has not produced substantive evidence beyond the bank manager’s statement.

Summary

The applicant, Munsarif, sought bail in a criminal case (No. 518 of 2025) where he was accused of fraudulently obtaining a KCC loan of Rs.5,00,000 by posing as Shabir Shah and acting as a guarantor. The FIR, filed by a bank manager, alleged offences under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 61(2) of the Banking Act, but the court found no corroborative evidence beyond the manager’s statement. The applicant had no prior criminal record and had been in custody for six months. The court noted that the alleged offences are bailable (triable by a Magistrate) and, given the lack of substantive evidence, granted bail. Bail was conditioned on personal bond, sureties, appearance in court, non‑interference with witnesses, and abstaining from criminal activity.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the alleged offences.
Whether the offences under Sections 318, 338, 336, 340 of the IPC and Section 61(2) of the Banking Act are bailable.
Whether the evidence presented is sufficient to justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Banking Act — s. 61(2)
Indian Penal Code — s. 318, 336, 338, 340

Subjects

bail
fraud
KCC loan
guarantor
bailable offences
Indian Penal Code
Banking Act
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5191 of 2026

Munsarif
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Santosh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and
Sri Vijay Bahadur Maurya, learned AGA for the State.

2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No.518 of 2025, under Sections 318(4),
338, 336(3), 340(2) and 61(2) BNS, Police Station Amroha Nagar,
District Amroha, during pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, FIR of the present case was
lodged against three persons by bank manager and according to the FIR,
named accused persons by playing fraud obtained KCC loan of
Rs.50,0000/- from the bank but during investigation applicant has been
made accused on the ground that actually, he represented himself as
Shabir Shah and became a guarantor but entire allegations levelled against
the applicant are totally false and except bald and verbal allegations there
is no cogent evidence that applicant represented himself as Shabir Shah
and became a guarantor in the alleged KCC loan of Rs.5,00,000/-.

4. He further submits, applicant is not having any previous criminal
history and all the alleged offences are traible by Magistrate and in the
present matter applicant is in jail since 05.11.2025 i.e. for last six months.

5. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not
dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the
applicant.
BAIL No. 5191 of 2026
2

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

7. However, as per allegation, KCC loan of Rs.5,00,000/- was obtained by
playing fraud and applicant represented himself as Shabir Shah and
became one of the guarantor but except the statement of the bank manager
there is no other evidence which can suggest that applicant was the person
who represented himself as Shabir Shah.

8. Further, even all the alleged offences are traible by Magistrate and
applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present
matter he is in jail since 05.11.2025 i.e. for last six months.

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

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

11. Let the applicant - Munsarif 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.

12. 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.

13. 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
BAIL No. 5191 of 2026
3

the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case
during trial.

(Sameer Jain,J.)
May 5, 2026/S.A.

Digitally signed by :-
SALMAN AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…