Harish Sharma vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43455 of 2025

Harish Sharma

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

¶5

Court No. - 69

¶6

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Vinod Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the first informant (upon appearance filed today) and Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.841 of 2025, under Sections109(1), 3(5) BNS, Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Bulandshahr, during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that though in the FIR, allegation has been made that the applicant who is the husband of the injured has fired upon her but injured in her statement made allegation that this is the person who was on motor cycle who caused firearm injury to her at the instigation of the applicant. Though, in the CCTV footage, the applicant was not present at the time of firing upon the injured. It is further submitted that the applicant has explained the criminal history of one case in the accompanying affidavit. It is further submitted that charge sheet has been filed in the present case, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation. The applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 03.09.2025. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶10

BAIL No. 43455 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶13

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Let the applicant- Harish Sharma, involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:-

¶15

i. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶17

iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶18

iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him.

¶19

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

¶20

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶21

It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within

¶22

BAIL No. 43455 of 2025

¶23

3

¶24

15 days.

¶25

It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant.

¶26

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.

¶27

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)

¶28

December 10, 2025 S.C.

¶29

Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM CHAURASIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Harish Sharma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish Sharma 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

Similar cases

Raju Shukla vs State of U.P.

Naushad vs State of U.P.

Shrimati Devi vs State of U.P.

Mahendra vs State of U.P.

Raj Vishwakarma vs State of U.P.

Ashish @ Bhura vs State of U.P.