Allahabad High Court
BAIJNATHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court granted bail to the applicant, holding that the lack of injury, acquittal of co‑accused, and the applicant's willingness to comply outweighed concerns of absconding.
Summary
The applicant, Baijnath, was arrested in connection with a 1992 case under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code alleging that he and others threw bombs at police, though no police personnel were injured. He has been in custody since 13 November 2025 and claims false implication, asserting no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, arguing that the applicant had absconded twice and might do so again if released. The court noted that the co‑accused had been acquitted, the alleged offence resulted in no injury, and the applicant was willing to give an undertaking not to seek adjournments or tamper with evidence. Considering the prolonged detention and the circumstances, the court granted bail subject to standard conditions and surety requirements.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused under Section 307 IPC when the alleged offence caused no injury and co‑accused have been acquitted.
- Whether the applicant's prior absconding constitutes a sufficient ground to deny bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed by the court are adequate to ensure the applicant's compliance with trial proceedings.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307
Subjects
- bail
- Section 307 IPC
- false implication
- absconding
- acquittal
- conditions of bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7822 of 2026
Baijnath
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd Suhail, Shiva Ji, Vivek Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 72
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, Learned A.G.A. for the State and
perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 5582 of 1992, under Section 307 of
I.P.C., Police Station- Mutthiganj, District- Prayagraj.
3. The Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. This is a case of police party firing no
injury in which the applicant is said to be participated, however, no police
personnel have received any injury. The applicant is in jail since 13.11.2025
having no criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that in case, the
applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will
cooperate in the trial proceedings.
4. The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and has
contended that the applicant is an absconder. The present case is a case
relating to the year 1992 and the applicant has absconded twice. The trial for
the co-accused had already concluded and in case the applicant is granted
bail he is likely to abscond again.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the
parties and perused the record.
6. The applicant and other accused are said to have thrown bombs on the
police personnel, however, no police personnel received any injury. The
applicant is said to have absconded twice, however, learned counsel for the
applicant has stated that the applicant is ready to file an undertaking that he
would not seek any adjournment in the case and will cooperate in the
expeditious disposal of the trial. Co-accused persons namely Aushutosh
BAIL No. 7822 of 2026
2
Jaiswal, Bablu @ Rajesh, Abhay and Raju, who were tried in S.T. No. 1024 of
2010 have been acquitted by the Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Court No. 27, Allahabad vide order dated 20.3.2012. The applicant is in jail
since 13.11.2025.
7. Taking into account the entire facts, the period of detention undergone by
the applicant, and the fact that the co-accused, who were similarly situated to
the applicant, were acquitted by the trial court, I deem it fit to enlarge the
applicant on bail.
8. The bail application is allowed.
9. Let the accused-applicant- Baijnath, involved in above mentioned case
crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and three
reliable sureties each, one of which shall be local sureity, in the like amount to
the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:
i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.
iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and
co-operate in the trial.
iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial
court, unless his personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
v. The applicant shall not seek any adjournment and shall cooperate in the
expeditious disposal of the trial and an undertaking to this effect shall be filed
before the trial Court.
10. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the trial court will
be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.
11. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website of
High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the
undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.
12. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the
concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure
early release of the applicant.
May 6, 2026
Fahad
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
FAHAD NIYAZ
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…