Abhishek vs State of U.P.

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.685 of 2025, under Sections117(2), 352, 351(3), 109(1) BNS, 2023, Police Station-Civil Lines, District-Mordabad, during the pendency of the trial.

¶12

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that in the initial application to the SSP, Moradabad, specific allegation for throwing the brick which hit the head of the injured Yash has been made against the co-accused Saurabh. However, subsequently the injured as well as first informant during investigation made allegation that both the accused have thrown a brick which hit the injured Yash. It is further submitted that that there is only one injury to the injured and there was no intention to cause injury and no specific role has been assigned to the present applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. 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 10.11.2025. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶13

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶14

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,

¶15

BAIL No. 44435 of 2025

¶16

2

¶17

submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taking into account over crowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before trial courts, 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.

¶18

Let the applicant- Abhishek, 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:-

¶19

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.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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 15 days.

¶26

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.

¶27

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

¶28

BAIL No. 44435 of 2025

¶29

3

¶30

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.

¶31

December 16, 2025 S.C.

¶32

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)

¶33

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

Abhishek v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

Abhishek 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

Teekam vs State of U.P.

Himanshu vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Gupta vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Kishun vs State of U.P.

Piyush @ Chhotu vs State of U.P.

Shrinath vs State of U.P.