Rishabh Vs State of U.P. and Another

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 538 of 2025, under Sections 309(4), 317(2) BNS, Police Station Tundla, District Firozabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that FIR of the present case was lodged against two motorcycle riders for offence under section 304(2) BNS with the allegation that two unknown motorcyle riders committed theft of two cameras of the informant and during investigation on the basis of recovery of alleged cameras of the informant, applicant has been made accused in the present matter.

¶13

He further submitted that entire allegations made against the applicant are totally false and actually nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant.

¶14

He further submitted that however, during investigation the instant case has been converted for offence punishable under section 309(4) BNS i.e. robbery but actually it is not a case of robbery and at the worst as per allegation it could be a case of theft.

¶15

He further submitted that even offence under section 309(4) and 317(2) BNS are triable by magistrate and applicant is having no previous criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 7.12.2025 i.e. for last five months.

¶16

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶18

However, as per allegation during investigation alleged robbed cameras were recovered from the possession of the applicant but all the alleged offences are triable

¶19

BAIL No. 4698 of 2026

¶20

2

¶21

by magistrate and applicant is having no previous criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 7.12.2025 i.e. for last five months.

¶22

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶23

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶24

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

¶25

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶26

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶27

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶28

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶29

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

May 5, 2026

Ankita

(Sameer Jain,J.)

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rishabh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishabh v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Nitendra Singh vs State of U.P.

Rambhavan vs State of U.P.

Raju vs State of U.P.

Ankur Shukla Vs State of U.P.

Ankit Vs State of U.P.

Asif Vs State of U.P.