Allahabad High Court
SALMAN TOMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the accused-applicants subject to a personal bond, sureties and strict conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Salman Tomar and Bhanu Chaudhary, accused in a vehicle‑theft case (Crime No. 51 of 2026). The applicants argued that their arrest and the recovery of stolen vehicles were illegal because procedural requirements under Sections 105 of the BNSS and Rule 18 of the U.P. BNS Rules 2024 were not complied with, and that the case relied solely on their confessional statements without independent witnesses. The State opposed bail, highlighting the seriousness of the offence, the applicants' extensive criminal histories, and the risk of evidence tampering. After weighing the nature of the accusations, the possibility of witness intimidation, and the lack of a flight risk, the Court allowed the bail application with a personal bond and sureties, imposing conditions to prevent tampering, criminal activity, and intimidation of witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted despite the seriousness of the vehicle‑theft charges and the applicants' prior criminal records.
- Whether the arrest and recovery were illegal due to non‑compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS and Rule 18 of the U.P. BNS Rules 2024.
- Whether there exists a prima facie case and a risk of tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses.
- Whether the applicants constitute a flight risk.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- illegal arrest
- confessional statement
- witness tampering
- flight risk
- vehicle theft
- surety bond
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8939 of 2026
Salman Tomar And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Dubey, Chandra Bhan
Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.
Heard Sri Afzal Ahmad Khan Durrani, learned counsel for the applicants,
Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-Respondent and perused
the record.
This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicants
seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 51 of 2026, under Sections
317(2), 317(4), 317(5), and 3(5) of the B.N.S., Police Station Phase-II,
District Gautam Buddh Nagar, during the pendency of the trial before the
court below. The application of the applicants before the court below was
rejected by the Sessions Judge, Gautam Buddh Nagar, vide order dated
06.02.2026 and the applicants are languishing in jail since 25.01.2026.
Learned counsel for the applicants while pressing the bail plea vehemently
argues that the applicants are entirely innocent and have been falsely
implicated in this very case crime number for ulterior motives. The FIR in
question has been lodged nominating the applicants and four other co-
accused persons who are alleged to have run away alleging that while
making routine check of suspicious vehicles and getting information from
police informer that two persons in a stolen vehicles are rooming to steal
vehicles. On approaching the stolen vehicle bearing registration No.
DLILAD0637 white coloured Bolero Maxi truck the applicant alighted from
the vehicle in question and began to run away but were apprehended by the
Police Team. The applicants on being arrested revealed that they along with
the co-accused persons had carried out theft of vehicles seven days ago and
BAIL No. 8939 of 2026
2
on their pointing out two other stolen vehicles and several other materials
were recovered from the go-down.
Learned counsel for the applicants has vehemently argued that the
complicity of the applicants in the commission of the crime is being
established merely on the basis of their confessional statements and the
planted recovery of the vehicles and other materials from the go-down. It is
argued that there is no independent witness to be alleged recovery and only
the police personnel were present at the time of their arrest and recovery. It
is also argued that the provisions of Sections 105 of BNSS and Rule 18 of
the U.P. BNS Rules 2024 have not been complied with inasmuch as the
video recording has not been made and the same has also not been sent to
the magistrate within 48 hours. The arrest and recovery thus is per se illegal
and the applicants are entitled to be released on bail forthwith. Reliance is
placed on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Shadab Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2026 SCC Online All 5 to buttress the
submission. It is also submitted that the Applicant No. 1 is credited with 8
criminal cases which have been duly explained in Para 18 of the bail
application while the Applicant No. 2 has 12 cases to his credit which too
have been duly explained in the said para. It is next argued that the
applicants are not flight risk and shall cooperate in the trial and not misuse
the liberty of bail. Hence bail is prayed for.
Learned counsel for the AGA has vehemently opposed, but could not dispute
the aforesaid fact raised by learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations,
severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting
evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima-
facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made
out.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the accused-applicants, Salman Tomar and Bhanu Chaudhary,
involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on their
executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount
to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following
BAIL No. 8939 of 2026
3
conditions:
1. The applicants will not tamper with the evidence.
2. The applicants will not indulge in any criminal activity.
3. The applicants will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses
and co-operate in the trial.
4. The applicants will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the
trial court, unless their personal appearance are exempted through counsel
by the court concerned.
In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below
will be at liberty to proceed to cancel their bail.
April 15, 2026
pks
(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
PAWAN KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…