Allahabad High Court
BAIL/35114/2026 of PRABHUSHEKHAR @ PRABHUSHEKH Vs STATE OF U.P. THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME GOVERNMENT OF U.P. AT LUCKNOW on 30 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35114 of 2026 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Heard Sri Ajendra Kumar, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri Basant Yadav, learned counsel holding brief appeared for informant and learned A.G.A. for State. 2. The
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35114 of 2026
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Sri Ajendra Kumar, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri Basant Yadav, learned counsel holding brief appeared for informant and learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused- Prabhushekhar @ Prabhushekh to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 133 of 2026, under Sections 61(2), 351(4), 109(1) BNS and Section 27/30 Arms Act, P.S.- Sakeet, District- Etah, during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the accused applicant has been falsely implicated in FIR dated 22.08.2026 lodged by the Vikas Chauhan with the allegation against five named persons including the accused applicant that the informant has purchased one of the plot from the relative of the accused applicant and there was compromise between the parties as to the dispute about the property. Later on, while the informant started construction over the same, the accused persons came and started assaulting them. The allegations specifically on the accused applicant that he has opened fire with the licensed gun of his uncle. It is the contention of learned counsel that it is no injury case. The accused applicant has no criminal history. Investigation is continuing and applicant is co-operating in the investigation. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 28.08.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Neeraj Kumar Srivastava, Rajesh Kumar, Satyam Mishra Prabhushekhar @ Prabhushekh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Through Principal Secretary Home Government Of U.P. At Lucknow .....Opposite Party(s)
4. Learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A. for State opposed the bail application and submit that an empty cartridge has been recovered from the place of incident. There is specific allegation against the accused applicant that he has opened fire from the licenced gun. There is property dispute. Hence, seek rejection of the bail application.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering that no injury case and there is a property dispute between the parties, the accused/applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
8. The accused/applicant 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 court concerned in view of observation made by the Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and speedy disposal. October 1, 2026 Sharad/- BAIL No. 35114 of 2026 2 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad