Allahabad High Court
LAKHAN LALversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted to the accused in view of the seriousness of the offence and the victim’s specific identification of him.
Summary
The applicant, Lakhan Lal, was charged under Section 109 of the Uttar Pradesh B.N.S. for allegedly causing a gun‑shot injury to a 14‑year‑old boy during a marriage celebration. He claimed innocence, arguing that the injury resulted from celebratory firing and that the FIR was lodged fifteen days after the incident, suggesting a fabricated case. The informant and the injured boy identified the applicant as the assailant in a statement under Section 180, and the injury was serious enough to be potentially fatal. The court considered the gravity of the offence, the specific accusation by the victim, and the seriousness of the injury. Concluding that the circumstances did not warrant bail, the court rejected the applicant’s bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving a serious firearm injury that could be fatal.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR affects the applicant’s entitlement to bail.
- Whether the specific identification of the accused by the victim under Section 180 precludes bail.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh B.N.S. — s. 109, 180
Subjects
- bail
- criminal trial
- Section 109
- Section 180
- firearm injury
- delay in FIR
- serious offence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9960 of 2026
Lakhan Lal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mahesh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Arvind Kumar, G.A., Jitendra Kumar
Pandey
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the
informant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
2. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case
crime no. 207 of 2025, under Section 109 B.N.S., P. S. Charwa, District-
Kaushambi, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
3. As per the F. I. R. allegations, which was lodged by the father of the
injured, the prosecution case is that the applicant caused gun shot injuries
to his son Abhishek, resultantly, he got injured, leading his admission to
Swarup Rani Hospital, Prayagraj.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case
due to some ulterior motive. He further submitted that incident occurred
in a marriage celebration and the injured sustained gun shot injury in
celebratory firing, not by the applicant. He next submitted that the
incident is alleged to have taken place on 25.9.2025, whereas the F. I. R.
of the same was lodged after delay of fifteen days on 9.10.2025 and there
is no explanation for delay in lodging the first information report, which
suggests that the F. I. R. was lodged after due deliberation and as an
afterthought. He lastly submitted that the applicant, who is in jail since
13.1.2026 and has no criminal antecedents, is entitled to be enlarged on
bail during pendency of the trial.
BAIL No. 9960 of 2026
2
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned AGA
have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that gun short injury has
been caused to the injured in his stomach, which could have proved fatal
to his life, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
The informant and injured both have reiterated the F. I. R. version. The
details of the injuries are as under:-
"Mr. Abhishek, 14 years, S/o Ram Dinesh, R/o Badeshar, P. S.
Manjhanpur, Kaushambi, Uttar Pradesh was admitted in S. R. N.
Hospital on 26.9.2025 at 12.15 AM with complain of injury in abdomen
(firearm injury Gun Shot) due to alleged history firearm injury (gun
shot) on 25.9.2025 history given by Vimal Singh (neighbor).
Patient was managed operatively by EL c P L c double barrel ileostomy
unclear GA on 26.9.2025 in OT 2. Patient was further managed with C/o
sore of ileostomy unclear GA in OT 4 on 31.10.25. Patient was further
managed with iv fluids, iv antibiotics, iv analyestics and other
supportive measures. Patient was discharged with Stable vitals on
12.11.25 with regular follow up advice."
6. Having considered the rival contentions of the parties, nature of offence,
evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and all attending
facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the injured has
specifically named the applicant, attributing the role of causing gun shot
injury in his abdomen, in his statement recorded under Section 180 B. N. S.
S. as well as that the gun shot injury inflicted in the abdomen of the injured,
could have proved fatal to his life, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the
applicant on bail.
7. Accordingly, the bail application moved on behalf of the applicant,
Lakhan Lal is rejected.
April 8, 2026
HR
(Harvir Singh,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
HEMANT RANJAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…