Allahabad High Court

SANJEET KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 11 May 2026
Bench: SAMEER JAIN

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail and allowed the bail application.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sanjeet Kumar, who was arrested in connection with a case under Section 304(2) of the BNS for allegedly snatching a golden chain. The applicant contended that the allegations were false and that his inclusion as an accused was based solely on the statement of co‑accused Manjeet Kumar, who had already been released on bail. The State opposed the bail but did not dispute the factual contentions raised by the applicant. The Court noted that the co‑accused’s bail, the applicant’s explained criminal history, and the fact that he had been in custody since 25‑11‑2025 weighed in favor of granting bail. Without expressing any view on the merits of the underlying offence, the Court allowed the bail application subject to a personal bond and two sureties with standard conditions. The order clarified that its observations are limited to the bail matter and do not affect the trial’s merits.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case under Section 304(2) of the BNS considering the co‑accused’s bail, the applicant’s criminal history, and the period of pre‑trial detention.

Legislation cited

BNS — s. 304(2)

Subjects

bail
Section 304(2)
BNS
criminal history
co‑accused
personal bond
sureties
Uttar Pradesh

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6438 of 2026

Sanjeet Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Piyush Patel, Pradeep Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard Sri Piyush Patel, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
Shatrughan Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 207 of 2025, under Section
304(2) of BNS, Police Station- Nautanwa, District- Maharajganj,
during pendency of the trial in the court below.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that however, as per
allegation, applicant involved along with other accused in snatching
the golden chain of the informant but entire allegations levelled
against the applicant are totally false.

4. He further submits that during investigation, applicant has been
made accused on the basis of the statement of the co-accused
Manjeet Kumar, who was arrested at the spot and co-accused
Manjeet Kumar has already been released on bail by the
coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.04.2026 passed
in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6765 of 2026.

5. He further submits, however, apart from the present case,
applicant is having criminal history of 13 other cases but his entire
criminal history has been explained and it reflects that only due to
previous criminal history during investigation, police implicated him in
the present matter.
BAIL No. 6438 of 2026
2

6. He further submits, in majority of the previous cases, applicant is
on bail and in the present matter, he is in jail since 25.11.2025 i.e. for
last more than five months.

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

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

9. Considering the argument advanced by learned counsel for the
applicant and the facts that the co-accused Manjeet Kumar, who was
arrested on the spot, has already been released on bail and criminal
history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail
application and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since
25.11.2025, 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- Sanjeet Kumar 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
BAIL No. 6438 of 2026
3

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

(Sameer Jain,J.)
May 12, 2026
Mini

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…