Sumit Verma Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30114 of 2025

Sumit Verma

.....Applicant(s) Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Brajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 67

¶6

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶7

List has been revised.

¶8

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶9

Heard Sri Brajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶10

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.303 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 351(3), 352, 109(1) B.N.S., 2023, Police Station Bilhour, District Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

¶11

As per prosecution story, the applicant and two other co-accused persons are stated to have assaulted and caused grievous injuries to the brother of the informant on 30.07.2025 at about 4:00 p.m.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about three and half hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The injuries sustained by the injured person are simple in nature, although a fracture was observed on the leg of the injured person, but that is not the vital part of the body.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons including the applicant. The criminal history of two cases assigned to the applicant stands

¶14

BAIL No. 30114 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 02.08.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶17

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶18

The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. And Another, (2020) 11 SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out.

¶19

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 in institution of FIR and there being general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons, 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 .

¶20

Let the applicant- Sumit Verma , 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.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

¶27

September 17, 2025

¶28

(Ravi Kant)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sumit Verma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumit Verma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases