Allowed¶19

Ankit Chaube v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Allahabad HC12 Mar 2026BAIL/1737/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Ankit Chaube bail allowed; Sections 309(6) B.N.S.; Case Crime No. 298 of 2025; P.S. Kotwali Beekapur, District Ayodhya; parity with co-accused Avneesh Chaube (Bail Application No. 11072 of 2025, order dated 18.11.2025); in jail since 11.12.2025; criminal history of five cases explained; first bail application; personal bond and two sureties; Rajeev Bharti, J.; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow; March 12, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement of applicant Ankit Chaube on bail in Case Crime No. 298 of 2025 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (no tampering with prosecution evidence, no pressurizing prosecution witnesses, appearance on every date fixed by the trial Court; further conditions left to the trial court). ¶19

Ankit Chaube vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Ankit Chaube, involved in Case Crime No. 298 of 2025 under Sections 309(6) B.N.S. (Police Station Kotwali Beekapur, District Ayodhya), should be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Court's answer

Having heard counsel and perused the record, and considering that co-accused Avneesh Chaube had already been granted bail, that the applicant was in jail since 11.12.2025, and that his criminal history stood duly explained, the Court held - without entering into the merits - that it was a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Bail application allowed; the applicant Ankit Chaube to be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned.

¶19

Key takeaways

Release made subject to conditions: (i) applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, either personally or through counsel; the trial court/concerned court may also impose any other conditions it deems fit and proper.ratio¶22
Observations in the order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial; the merits were expressly left open.obiter¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Rajeev Bharti, J. - Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1737 of 2026, decided March 12, 2026. First bail application by Ankit Chaube in Case Crime No. 298 of 2025 under Sections 309(6) B.N.S., P.S. Kotwali Beekapur, District Ayodhya. Bail allowed on the grounds of parity with co-accused Avneesh Chaube (already granted bail by this Court on 18.11.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11072 of 2025), custody since 11.12.2025, and criminal history of five cases duly explained; the Court did not enter into the merits. Release directed on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions against tampering with prosecution evidence and pressurizing prosecution witnesses, and requiring appearance on each date fixed by the trial Court; the trial court may impose further conditions. Observations expressly confined to the bail application, with no bearing on the merits of the trial.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1737 of 2026

Ankit Chaube

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shyam Karan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 23

¶9

HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶11

This is first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 298 of 2025, under Sections 309 (6) of B.N.S, Police Station Kotwali Beekapur, District Ayodhya.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant is also not named in the First Information Report. It is further submitted that co-accused Avneesh Chaube has already been granted bail vide order dated 18.11.2025 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11072 of 2025.

¶13

It is further submitted that the applicant has criminal history of five cases, which have duly been explained in para 20 of the bail application and he is in jail since 11.12.2025. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. He undertakes that in case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶15

BAIL No. 1737 of 2026

¶16

¶17

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record and considering the fact that the co-accused Avneesh Chaube has already been granted bail; the applicant is in jail since 11.12.2025; criminal history of the applicant has duly been explained and without entering into the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶19

Let the applicant- Ankit Chaube involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶20

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶21

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶22

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, either personally or through his counsel.

¶23

Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial.

¶25

(Rajeev Bharti,J.)

¶26

March 12, 2026

¶27

Preeti

¶28

Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ankit Chaube v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Chaube v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

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

Aashu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Chand Babu @ Mustafa and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Naval Kishor @ Sunil vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Seema vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko.

Sandeeep @ Godhan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P.

Radhe Muni @ Rohan Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.