Allowed

Bablu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Sept 2025BAIL/15319/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail allowed; Allahabad High Court; Krishan Pahal, J.; September 18, 2025; CRL MISC BAIL No. 15319 of 2025; applicant Bablu vs State of U.P.; Case Crime No. 62 of 2025; Sections 109(1) B.N.S.; Section 3/25 Arms Act; P.S. Mirzapur, District Shahjahanpur; firing injuring three persons on 23.02.2025 at 09:30 PM; FIR delay of six days unexplained; injury report prepared before alleged time of offence;

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant Bablu in Case Crime No. 62 of 2025 (Sections 109(1) B.N.S.; Section 3/25 Arms Act, P.S. Mirzapur, District Shahjahanpur) on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each i

Bablu Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15319 of 2025

Bablu

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ashok Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 67

¶8

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶9

List has been revised.

¶10

Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yogesh Mishra, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶11

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.62 of 2025, under Sections 109(1) B.N.S. and Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station-Mirzapur, DistrictShahjahanpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶12

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have fired and caused injuries to three person in the night of 23.02.2025 at about 09:30 PM.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about six days and there is no explanation to the said delay caused. The injuries have been manufactured as the medical examination of the three injured person was undertaken before the time of offence. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.03.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay of six days in institution of FIR coupled with the fact

¶16

BAIL No. 15319 of 2025

¶17

¶18

that injury report was prepared before the alleged time of offence, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant- Bablu , who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶20

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶24

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶25

September 18, 2025 Karan

¶26

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

¶27

Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bablu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bablu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases