Allahabad High Court

ANASversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 19 April 2026
Bench: SAMEER JAIN

Holding

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Anas, accused in Crime No. 666 of 2025 under several sections of the BNS and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The applicant claimed that the alleged firearm injury to the victim, Sartaj, was actually caused by a hard blunt object, as reflected in the medical report. The court noted that the applicant has two other pending cases but is already on bail in those matters, and he had been in custody for more than two and a half months. The prosecution could not refute the applicant’s factual submissions. Weighing these factors, the court concluded that the applicant is entitled to bail, subject to standard conditions, without expressing any view on the merits of the underlying criminal case.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite allegations of firing a weapon causing injury
Whether the medical report negating a firearm injury influences the bail decision
Whether the applicant's prior criminal history and pending cases affect bail eligibility
Whether the period of pre‑trial detention justifies granting bail

Legislation cited

BNS — s. 109(1), 115(2), 131, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(3), 352
Criminal Law Amendment Act — s. 7

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
medical evidence
prior criminal history
pre‑trial detention
Uttar Pradesh

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5369 of 2026

Anas
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Diwanshu Tiwari, Jitendra Kumar
Singh, Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Shailesh
Kumar Upadhyay
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shailendra Kumar Tripathi

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

1. Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Durgesh Kumar Pandey, learned Advocate, holding brief of Sri
Shailendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant and Dr.
S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State.

2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No.666 of 2025, under Sections 109(1),
191(2), 191(3), 351(3), 352, 131, 190, 115(2) of BNS and Section 7 of
Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Chhibramau, District
Kannauj, during pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, as per allegation,
due to fire opened by the applicant, injured Sartaj sustained injury on his
leg but from the medical report of the injured, it reflects he did not sustain
any fire arm injury.

4. He further submits, according to the doctor, injured Sartaj sustained
injury through hard and blunt object and, therefore, it is apparent that on
the basis of false allegation, applicant has been made accused in the
present matter along with others.

5. He further submits, however, apart from the present case, applicant is
having criminal history of two other cases but his criminal history has
been duly explained and in both the cases, he is on bail.
BAIL No. 5369 of 2026
2

6. He further submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail since
28.01.2026 i.e. for the last more than two and half months.

7. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant
opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts
advanced by learned counsel for applicant.

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

9. However, as per allegation, due to fire opened by the applicant, injured
Sartaj sustained fire arm injury on his leg but from perusal of the medical
report of the injured, it reflects he did not sustain any fire arm injury and
it appears he sustained injury caused by hard and blunt object.

10. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having
criminal history of two other cases but his criminal history has been duly
explained in the instant bail application and in both the cases, he is on
bail.

11. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 28.01.2026 i.e.
for the last more than two and half months.

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 - Anas 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
BAIL No. 5369 of 2026
3

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.

(Sameer Jain,J.)
April 20, 2026
Mini

Digitally signed by :-
MINI KANAUJIYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…