Narendra vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12519 of 2026

Narendra

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Rishika Raj Singhal, Shivendra Raj Singhal, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Rajesh Kumar Kanojia, G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 90

¶6

HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Dharmendra Singhal, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Shivendra Raj Singhal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Kanojia, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶8

The present third bail application has been filed by the applicantaccused in Case Crime No.95 of 2021, under Sections - 147, 148, 149, 323, 427, 441, 447, 307, 302, 506, 34 I.P.C., Police Station- Falavda, District- Meerut with the prayer to enlarge the applicant-accused on bail. The second bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 16.01.2025.

¶9

Learned Senior counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It was submitted that the first information report was lodged against 13 accused persons, including applicant, alleging that on account of property dispute, they have attacked the informant and his family members and resultantly informant's brother Sompal has died and other persons sustained injuries. It was submitted that specific role of firing at deceased has been attributed to co-accused Vikas @ Pappu and no specific rule was assigned to the applicant.

¶10

BAIL No. 12519 of 2026

¶11

2

¶12

It is further submitted that the first bail application of applicant was allowed by this Court vide order dated 04.03.2022 but bail granted to the applicant, as well as to co-accused Krishanpal and Harendra, was cancelled by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 28.03.2023 passed in S.L.P., filed on behalf of informant. It was stated that after the third bail application of said co-accused Krishanpal has been allowed by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.04.2025. The informant has again filed an S.L.P. before the Hon'ble Apex Court against that order but the same was dismissed. The third bail application of another similarly placed co-accused Harendra has been allowed by the co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 26.02.2026. Referring to these facts, it was submitted that similarly placed co-accused persons have already been granted bail. It was stated that after the bail granted by this Court to applicant, was cancelled by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the applicant has surrendered on 17.04.2023 before the trial Court and since then he is in custody. It is further submitted that during trial only two witnesses have been examined so far and thus trial of the case is likely to take sufficient long time. Lastly, it was submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in trial.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail application. Learned counsel for informant submitted that applicant is brother of main accused Vikas @ Pappu and applicant was working in police. It was further submitted that after the incident, he has absconded and he was arrested after process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was issued against him. Lastly, it was submitted that there are serious allegations against applicant and no case for bail is made out.

¶14

I have considered rival submissions and perused the record.

¶15

Perusal of records shows that the first information report was lodged against 13 accused persons, including applicant, and the role of firing at the deceased has been attributed to co-accused Vikas @ Pappu. Earlier,

¶16

BAIL No. 12519 of 2026

¶17

3

¶18

the applicant was granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04.03.20222, however the said bail as well as the bail granted to co-accused Krishanpal & Harendra was cancelled by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order rated 28.03.2023. After that said co-accused persons, namely, Krishanpal and Harendra have been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Thus, it is apparent that similarly placed co-accused persons are already on bail. Applicant has already undergone custody of more than three years and it appears that trial is being preceded with snail's pace, as only two witnesses have been examined so far. Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits, a case for bail is made out.

¶19

The bail application is allowed .

¶20

Let the applicant - Narendra involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing each a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶21

i. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶22

ii. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate any of the prosecution witness.

¶23

iii. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶24

iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶25

v. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police

¶26

BAIL No. 12519 of 2026

¶27

4

¶28

officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶29