Allowed¶16

Mahendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2026BAIL/12756/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Ashutosh Srivastava, J., 27.04.2026; Bail Application No. 12756 of 2026; Mahendra v. State of U.P.; bail allowed; BNS Sections 352, 351(3), 338, 318(4), 336(3); Case Crime No. 307 of 2025; P.S. Bakewar, Etawah; charge-sheet filed; custody since 17.03.2026; gift deed marginal witness; pending injunction suit; one criminal antecedent; personal bond with two sureties; conditions of bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of accused-applicant Mahendra on bail on executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to four conditions (no tampering with evidence; no criminal activity; no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses and co-operation in trial; regular appearance on each date fixed by the trial court); breach entitles the court below to cancel bail.

Mahendra Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-applicant Mahendra should be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 307 of 2025 under Sections 352, 351(3), 338, 318(4), 336(3) of the B.N.S., Police Station Bakewar, District Etawah.

¶8

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances, nature of accusations, severity of punishment, nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with witnesses and primafacie case, but without commenting on the merit of the case, a case for bail is made out.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

The bail application is allowed; the accused-applicant Mahendra is to be released on bail on executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence, no criminal activity, no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses, regular appearance before the trial court); on breach of any condition the court below may cancel bail.

¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — Case Crime No. 307 of 2025, Sections 352, 351(3), 338, 318(4), 336(3) B.N.S., P.S. Bakewar, District Etawah — applicant in jail since 17.03.2026, charge-sheet filed — applicant claimed false implication, dispute civil in nature (pending Injunction Suit before Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Etawah), applicant only marginal witness of alleged gift deed and not beneficiary of sale deed, one criminal antecedent explained in affidavit — AGA opposed but could not dispute applicant's contentions — without commenting on merits, Court held a case for bail was made out and allowed the application, directing release on personal bond and two reliable sureties with conditions against tampering, criminal activity, witness intimidation, and requiring regular trial attendance; breach empowers court below to cancel bail.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12756 of 2026

¶3

Mahendra

¶4

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Puneet Bhadauria
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A., Sanjay Mishra

¶5

Court No. - 68

¶6

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-Respondent and perused the record.

¶8

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 307 of 2025, under Sections 352, 351(3), 338, 318(4), 336(3) of the B.N.S., Police Station Bakewar, District Etawah.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case crime number. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the dispute as narrated in the FIR appears to be purely civil in nature but the informant has given it a criminal colour only to harass the applicant and other co-accused. He submits that the applicant is only the marginal witness of the alleged gift deed. He submits that no credible evidence has been collected by the Investigating Officer to connect him in the present case. He submits that apart from the aforesaid criminal case the informant has also filed an Injunction Suit before the Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Etawah, which is still pending. He submits that the applicant is not the beneficiary of the alleged sale deed but the informant has dragged him in the present case with some ulterior motive. He submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed as such the applicant is not required for any custodial interrogation. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.03.2026. He submits that the applicant has criminal antecedent of one case to his credit which has been

¶10

BAIL No. 12756 of 2026

¶11

¶12

explained in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. He submits that there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, the bail has been prayed for.

¶13

Learned counsel for the AGA has vehemently opposed, but could not dispute the aforesaid fact raised by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and primafacie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the accused-applicant, Mahendra , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶17

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶18

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶19

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶20

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶21

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶22

April 27, 2026

¶23

pks

¶24

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mahendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akhil Srivastava vs State of U.P.

Jagdish Prasad vs State of U.P.

Anand Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P.

Nitin Choudhary Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Kumar Yadav @ Vikki and Another Vs State of U.P.

Ajeet Singh Rathore vs State of U.P.