Allahabad High Court
BAIL/34776/2026 of SABIR Vs STATE OF U.P. on 29 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34776 of 2026 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Heard Sri Mukul Yadav, learned counsel for accused applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused- Sabir to
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34776 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 Mukul Yadav, learned counsel for accused applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused- Sabir to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 188 of 2026, under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 352, 351(3) of BNS, P.S.- Kanth, District- Moradabad during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for accused applicant that the accused applicant has been implicated in FIR dated 5.8.2026 lodged by one of the injured informant with the allegation that four accused persons including the accused applicant had assaulted the informant and his other family members, namely, Saddam, Imtiyaz, Muskina by sharp edged weapon. The allegation in the FIR is that there was a dispute between the parties on the point of laying of road, which the accused were claiming to be their. It is further contended that there was panchayat in the village. The parties were not satisfied with the panchayat as such, it is alleged that the accused persons had assaulted the injured wherein Muskina suffered simple injuries whereas Saddam, Jahid and Imtiyaz suffered one grievous injury each, which are not fatal to life. It is further contended that in the supplementary medical report of Saddam, there is no abnormality deduct on the x-ray of right side scalp and accordingly Imtiyaz and Jahid also suffered injuries, which are reported grievous in nature on the non-vital part of their body. The investigation is continuing. The accused applicant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mukul Yadav, Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sabir .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
is co-operating in the investigation. The omnibus role has been shown in the FIR against all the accused persons. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 04.09.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed 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 the nature and number of injuries, the accused applicant is entitled to be enlarged 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. September 30, 2026 Abhishek Sri. BAIL No. 34776 of 2026 2 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad