Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11327 (ALL)

SHAHJAD v. STATE OF U.P.

BAIL/28702/2026 · 2026-09-28

Sameer Jain

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28702 of 2026 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed by State is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Shahrukh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 83 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2), BNS, Police Station Simbhawali, District Hapur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and nobody was named in the FIR but during investigation without any cogent evidence very casually applicant has been made accused in the present mater. 5. He further submitted that as per prosecution deceased developed illicit relationship with the mother of the applicant and therefore, applicant alongwith others eliminated him but except suspicion and confessional statement of the applicant and statement of the co-accused recorded by the Investigating Officer, there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record. 6. He further submitted that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but all the cases were of theft and in all the cases he is on bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kushagra Srivastava, Saumya Srivastava, Shahrukh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shahjad .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. He further submitted that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 10.4.2025 i.e. for last one and half year. 8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and nobody was named in the FIR but it reflects, during investigation applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the basis of his confessional statement recorded by the Investigating Officer. 11. It further reflects, except suspicion and confessional statement of the applicant and statement of the co-accused recorded by the Investigating Officer, there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record which, prima facie, suggests that applicant is involved in commission of the present crime. 12. Further, however apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but his criminal history has been explained and all the cases were of minor nature and in all the cases he is on bail. 13. Further in the present matter, applicant is in jail for last one and half year. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant-Shahjad, 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:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or BAIL No. 28702 of 2026 2 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. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 17. 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. 18. 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. September 29, 2026 Ankita BAIL No. 28702 of 2026 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad