Hasnain vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Hasnain vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Hasnain to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, sureties to be verified before the release order, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence; no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses; appearance before the trial court on fixed dates), breach being a ground for cancellation of bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, in custody since 19.07.2024 in Case Crime No. 217 of 2024 (various sections of BNS, Police Station Shahi, District Bareilly), is entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity with similarly placed co-accused Jeeshan Ali, who has already been enlarged on bail.

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail, and allowed the bail application on the ground of parity with the co-accused Jeeshan Ali.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the sureties to be verified before the release order, subject to conditions that he will not tamper with the evidence, will not pressurise/intimidate prosecution witnesses, and will appear before the trial court on dates fixed; breach of any condition to be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Key takeaways

It was made clear that the 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.obiter¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Krishan Pahal, J.), by order dated October 28, 2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35259 of 2025, allowed the bail application of Hasnain, accused in Case Crime No. 217 of 2024 under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 324, 74, 331(6), 3(5), 103(2) and 61(2) of the BNS, Police Station Shahi, District Bareilly. Bail was granted solely on the ground of parity with similarly placed co-accused Jeeshan Ali, who had already been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench vide order dated 28.08.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 47608 of 2024; the A.G.A. did not dispute the parity. The applicant, in jail since 19.07.2024 with one explained criminal case, was to be released on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and intimidating prosecution witnesses, breach being a ground for cancellation. Reliance was placed on Prabhakar Tewari (2020) 11 SCC 648, Nanha 1993 Crl.L.J. 938, Paras Ram Vishnoi MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and Satender Kumar Antil (2022) 10 SCC 51. No opinion was expressed on the merits, and the observations were stated not to affect the trial Judge's independent assessment of the testimony.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35259 of 2025

Hasnain

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Anand Kumar Srivastava, Rai, Venu Gopal	Sudhir Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 67

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

Heard Sri Venu Gopal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 217 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 324, 74, 331(6), 3(5), 103(2), 61(2) of BNS, Police Station - Shahi, District - Bareilly, during the pendency of trial.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Jeeshan Ali has already been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.08.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 47608 of 2024. It is further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at par to the co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

Learned counsel has also stated that criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant has been explained in the affidavit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.07.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of parity to the co-accused has not

BAIL No. 35259 of 2025

2

been disputed by him.

In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648 , the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, evidence on record, pending trial and in the light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 coupled with the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 , without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

Let the applicant- Hasnain , 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.

i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

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

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

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

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.

October 28, 2025 Siddhant

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad