Mange vs State Of U.P.
- Neutral2026:AHC:104765
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a court considers the nature of the offence, the material and evidence on record, the complicity of the accused, and the severity of punishment prescribed, it may grant bail to an accused person pending trial. Upon such grant, the accused must furnish a personal bond and two local sureties of an amount fixed by the court, and breach of any conditions imposed may result in cancellation of bail.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Heard Shri Manoj Mishra along with Shri Shashank Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Mange with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.379 of 2024, under Sections 191 (2), 115 (2), 352, 341 (2), 110 BNS, Police Station-Sadar Bazar, District-Agra, and Case No. 13990 of 2024, during pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the present case and is languishing in jail since 22.08.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that first information report was lodged against five named persons, including the applicant, with the allegation that on the date of incident due to some dispute, all the accused persons, hurled abuses and beaten the first informant and other persons in which the first informant and five other persons sustained injuries. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a cross case version as before lodging the present first information report, a first information report for the same incident was lodged by the applicant against the first informant and other persons, on the same day being Case Crime No. 378 of 2024. Three persons from the side of applicant, including the applicant, have also sustained injuries. It has been further argued that there is only general allegation against the applicant. No specific allegation has been levelled against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Considering the nature of the offence, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant-Mange, involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.
3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.
4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.
In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.
(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
May 6, 2026
Deepak/
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free