Allahabad High Court
SHEKHAR BHARDWAJversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The applicant, Shekhar Bhardwaj, was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 646 of 2025) alleging extortion and an attempt to fire at an informant, though no injury was caused. He has a prior criminal record of eleven cases, including five under Section 307 IPC, but in those cases no injury occurred and he is presently on bail in all of them. The applicant had been in custody since 30‑12‑2025. The State opposed bail, but could not refute the applicant’s factual submissions. The court noted the absence of injury, the applicant’s explained criminal history, and his eligibility for bail, and consequently ordered his release on bail with standard conditions. The order expressly limited its observations to the bail application and did not prejudice the trial’s merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the applicant despite charges of extortion and attempted firing under Sections 191, 190, 308, 109, 351 and 352 IPC.
- Whether the applicant’s prior criminal history, including five cases under Section 307 IPC, warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 308(5), 351(3), 352
Subjects
- bail
- extortion
- attempted firing
- no injury
- criminal history
- Indian Penal Code
- High Court of Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5247 of 2026
Shekhar Bhardwaj
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Araf Khan, Babali, Lihazur Rahman
Khan, Pushpendra Kumar, Ramdhan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Nagendra Kumar Singh
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant is taken on record.
2. Sri Sunil Kumar Tiwari, learned Advocate submits, Sri Pushpendra
Kumar is the counsel for informant but his name has wrongly been shown in
the cause list as counsel for applicant.
3. Heard Ms. Sonakshi Arora, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Araf
Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar Tiwari, learned
Advocate holding brief of Sri Pushpendra Kumar, learned counsel for
informant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State.
4. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant
on bail in Case Crime No. 646 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190,
308(5), 109(1), 351(3), 352 BNS, Police Station Civil Lines, District
Aligarh during pendency of the trial.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, as per allegation,
applicant and others tried to extort money from the informant and he also
opened fire upon him but admittedly none sustained any injury.
6. She further submits, applicant and informant both are resident of same
locality and some dispute arose between both of them and only due to this
reason he implicated the applicant in the present matter.
7. She further submits, however, apart from the present case applicant is
having criminal history of 11 other cases but his criminal history has been
BAIL No. 5247 of 2026
2
explained in the instant bail application and although five cases were of
Section 307 IPC but in these cases also none sustained any injury and in
majority of the cases applicant was not named in the FIR and in all the cases
applicant is on bail and even in one case after investigation final report has
been submitted.
8. She further submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail since
30.12.2025.
9. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for informant opposed the
prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by
learned counsel for the applicant.
10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the
case.
11. However, as per allegation, applicant and others tried to extort money
from the informant and also opened fire upon him but admittedly none
sustained any injury, therefore, it appears to be a case of no injury.
12. Further, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history
of 11 other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant
bail application and although five cases were of Section 307 IPC but in these
cases also none sustained any injury and in majority of cases applicant was
not named in the FIR and he has been made accused during investigation
and in all the cases applicant is on bail.
13. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 30.12.2025.
14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed
above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.
16. Let the applicant - Shekhar Bhardwaj 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.
BAIL No. 5247 of 2026
3
(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.
17. 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.
18. 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
AK Pandey
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…