Allahabad High Court
WASIMversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Wasim in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8560 of 2026, relating to a 2013 case (Cr. No. 515 of 2013) with charges under IPC sections 364, 394, 302, 201 and 411. The applicant was not originally named in the FIR but later appeared in a co‑accused’s confessional statement; no weapon was recovered and he had previously been granted bail in 2013. After participating in the trial until June 2025, he could not appear due to being wanted in other matters and suffering paralysis, and the trial had been delayed for over 12 years with no witness examination. The court examined the right to a speedy trial, the applicant’s alleged absconding, and the Supreme Court’s guidelines on bail, including the cases of Hussainara Khatoon, Kapil Wadhawan, Maya Tiwari and the 2021 policy on bail. Balancing the nature of the offences, the evidence, jail overcrowding and the delay, the court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to strict conditions. The order directed his release on bail with personal bond, sureties and compliance with several procedural safeguards.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offences and alleged period of absconding
- Whether the prolonged delay in trial and lack of witness examination violate the right to a speedy trial warranting bail
- Whether the Supreme Court’s bail jurisprudence and policy guidelines apply to grant bail in this case
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 364, 394, 411
Subjects
- bail
- speedy trial
- IPC offences
- trial delay
- absconding
- jail overcrowding
- bail conditions
- Supreme Court jurisprudence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8560 of 2026
Wasim
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Alok Kumar Singh, Chandra Kumar Rai,
Rakesh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Chandra Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the applicant,
Sri Roshan Kumar Singh, 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. 515 of 2013, under Sections
364, 394, 302, 201, 411 IPC, Police Station- Masuri, District
Ghaziabad, during the pendency of the trial.
3. This matter was heard on 06.05.2026. On that date, learned
counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant was not named
in the FIR. Subsequently, his name has surfaced in the confessional
statement of the co-accused, though, there is no recovery of any
weapon on pointing out of the applicant. It is further submitted that
applicant was granted bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3905
of 2013 vide order dated 20.12.2013. Thereafter, applicant had also
participated in trial till 13.06.2025 but subsequently, applicant could
not appear before the trial court for the reasons that the applicant is
wanted in other cases and was also suffering from paralysis.
4. Considering the above submission, this court vide order dated
06.05.2026 directed the District Judge, Ghaziabad to submit his
report why not a single witness has been examined, though charges
were framed on 31.03.2014. In compliance of the order dated
06.05.2026, District Judge, Ghaziabad has submitted his report dated
13.05.2026 mentioning therein that main reason for delay in trial is
absence of missing report from the record and despite repeated
BAIL No. 8560 of 2026
2
requests by the trial court, police has not provided the same and also
for the reason that the co-accused have been absconding. It was
further mentioned in the aforesaid report that the applicant was
absconding since 04.07.2023 till he was arrested on 30.10.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant
has explained the criminal history of eight cases in the accompanying
affidavit. It is further submitted that though more than 12 years have
passed, but still not a single witness could be examined, therefore,
right to speedy trial has been infringed. In such circumstances,
applicant is entitled to be released on bail in view of the judgement of
the Apex Court in the cases of Hussainara Khatoon And Others
(IV) Vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna reported in (1980) 1
SCC 98 and Sahil Manoj Machare Vs. State of Maharashtra in
SLP (Crl.) No.7502 of 2026.
6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view
the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking
into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases
before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the
judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs
Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC
3038 as well as guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs.
State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant
of bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I
am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
8. Let the applicant- Wasim, involved in the aforementioned crime be
released on bail, on his 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 not directly or indirectly make any 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 to
any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely
BAIL No. 8560 of 2026
3
without seeking any adjournment.
iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or
commission of any crime after being released on bail.
iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the
bond executed by him.
v. Considering the criminal history of the applicant, this Court
further directs that applicant will mark his presence before the
police station-Masuri, district-Ghaziabad on 25th of every month,
till conclusion of trial and he will also appear before the trial
court on each and every date except for exceptional reasons.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.
10. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties
be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
11. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant
as well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant
through Ghaziabad Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal
within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the
case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ
Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in
(2024) 10 SCC 685.
May 14, 2026
S.C.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM CHAURASIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…