# Sohrab @ Sorab Ali v. State of U.P

- **Citation:** (2025) 11 ILRA 480
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2025-11-04
- **Case number:** Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 38294 of 2025
- **Bench:** Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/sohrab-sorab-ali-v-state-of-u-p-52872
- **Pages:** 7

## Headnote

G.A.

Issue for Consideration
Issue pertains to whether, having regard to
nature of allegations u/ss. 137(2) and 87 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the material collected
during investigation including the statement of
victim, the filing of charge-sheet, the period of
incarceration, and the principles governing grant
of bail, the applicant had made out a case for
being enlarged on bail during the pendency of
the trial, or whether his continued detention
was warranted in the facts and circumstances of
the case, without adjudicating upon the merits
of the prosecution case.

Headnotes
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - ss.
137(2)
and
87
-
Bharatiya
Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 - s. 183 - U.P. Jail
Manual, 2002 - R. 91 - The facts of the
case are that the applicant, Sohrab alias
Sorab Ali, was implicated in crime u/ss.
137(2) and 87 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023, on the allegation that he had
enticed away the minor daughter of first
informant, whereupon he was taken into
custody and remained incarcerated since
25.09.2025 - During investigation, the
victim, in her statement stated that she
11 All. Sohrab @ Sorab Ali Vs. State of U.P.
481
had left her parental home of her own will,
and upon completion of investigation, a
charge-sheet
was
filed
against
the
applicant - The applicant thereafter moved
the
instant
bail
application
seeking
release on bail during the pendency of
trial,
contending
false
implication,
absence
of
necessity
for
custodial
interrogation,
and
willingness
to
cooperate in the proceedings, while the
State opposed the prayer for bail.

Held: From perusal of the order of Apex Court
(infra), it is clear that there was a specific
direction to Jail Superintendent to enter the
date of grant of bail in e-prison software
immediately after receiving the copy of the bail
order, but because of non-availability of the jail
details, it has become difficult to directly send
copy of bail order to the accused-applicant -
Therefore, it is necessary that counsel in
Allahabad High Court as well as in Lucknow
Bench of this Court, while filing bail application
during trial or during pendency of appeal,
should also mention the details of jail where the
accused applicant/convict is confined - This
Court has also been apprised by the C.P.C.,
High Court, Allahabad that direct access to eprison portal through dedicated ID has not been
provided to the Bail Section as well as to
Criminal Appeal Section by the NIC so that the
bail orders could be directly sent to the jail
concerned through e-prison portal instead of
through e-mail - [Paras 14, 15] (E-13)

Case Law Cited
Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo
Motu
Writ
Petition
(Crl.)
No.4
of
2021
,reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685, decided
on 31.01.2023 - followed

List of Acts
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; U.P. Jail
Manual, 2002

List of Keywords
Bail application; ss. 137(2) and 87 BNS, 2023;
First information report; Allegation,; Victim;
Statement u/s 183 of BNSS; False implication;
Criminal history; Charge-sheet filed; Custodial
interrogation;
Law-abiding
citizen;
Incarceration; Entitled to enlarged on bail;
Personal bond; Sureties; Conditions of bail;
Cooperate in trial/investigation; Verification of
sureties; Release order; Bail Order Management
System (BOMS), Directions

Case Arising From
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No. - 38294 of 2025

From the Judgment passed in Case Crime No.
314 of 2025, u/ss. 137(2), 87 of BNS, P.S. Saini,
District Kaushambi

Appearances for Parties
Adv. for the Applicant:
Satya Priya Dwivedi

Adv. for the Opposite Party:
G.A.

## Text

480 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
19. In case of breach of any of the
above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.

20. Identity, status and residence
proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the
bonds are accepted.

21. The applicant shall be released
on the basis of downloaded copy of this
order from the official website of High
Court Allahabad and verified by the
concerned counsel with the undertaking
that the certified copy will be filed within
15 days.

22. It is further directed that the
trial court shall send the release order to the
concerned
jail
through
Bail
Order
Management System (BOMS) to ensure
early release of the applicant.

23. Office is directed to send a
copy of this order to the applicant through
concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or
e-prison portal in compliance of the order
of the Apex Court in the case of Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo
Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021
decided on 31.01.2023; reported in (2024)
10 SCC 685.

24.
Registrar
(Compliance)
is
directed to forthwith communicate this
order to the S.P., Firozabad for compliance
.Additionally , a copy of this order should
also be sent to he Director, J.T.R.I. to
inform judicial officers about the ratio of
Satender Kumar Antil case.

25. Personal appearance of Dr.
Ashwani Kumar Pachauri and I.O. Mr.
Faisal Khan (S.I.) is exempted.
----------
(2025) 11 ILRA 480
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 04.11.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH
DESHWAL, J.

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 38294 of
2025

Sohrab @ Sorab Ali ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. ....Opposite Party

Counsel for the Applicant:
Satya Priya Dwivedi

Counsel for the Opposite Party:
G.A.

Issue for Consideration
Issue pertains to whether, having regard to
nature of allegations u/ss. 137(2) and 87 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the material collected
during investigation including the statement of
victim, the filing of charge-sheet, the period of
incarceration, and the principles governing grant
of bail, the applicant had made out a case for
being enlarged on bail during the pendency of
the trial, or whether his continued detention
was warranted in the facts and circumstances of
the case, without adjudicating upon the merits
of the prosecution case.

Headnotes
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - ss.
137(2)
and
87
-
Bharatiya
Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 - s. 183 - U.P. Jail
Manual, 2002 - R. 91 - The facts of the
case are that the applicant, Sohrab alias
Sorab Ali, was implicated in crime u/ss.
137(2) and 87 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023, on the allegation that he had
enticed away the minor daughter of first
informant, whereupon he was taken into
custody and remained incarcerated since
25.09.2025 - During investigation, the
victim, in her statement stated that she
11 All. Sohrab @ Sorab Ali Vs. State of U.P.
481
had left her parental home of her own will,
and upon completion of investigation, a
charge-sheet
was
filed
against
the
applicant - The applicant thereafter moved
the
instant
bail
application
seeking
release on bail during the pendency of
trial,
contending
false
implication,
absence
of
necessity
for
custodial
interrogation,
and
willingness
to
cooperate in the proceedings, while the
State opposed the prayer for bail.

Held: From perusal of the order of Apex Court
(infra), it is clear that there was a specific
direction to Jail Superintendent to enter the
date of grant of bail in e-prison software
immediately after receiving the copy of the bail
order, but because of non-availability of the jail
details, it has become difficult to directly send
copy of bail order to the accused-applicant -
Therefore, it is necessary that counsel in
Allahabad High Court as well as in Lucknow
Bench of this Court, while filing bail application
during trial or during pendency of appeal,
should also mention the details of jail where the
accused applicant/convict is confined - This
Court has also been apprised by the C.P.C.,
High Court, Allahabad that direct access to eprison portal through dedicated ID has not been
provided to the Bail Section as well as to
Criminal Appeal Section by the NIC so that the
bail orders could be directly sent to the jail
concerned through e-prison portal instead of
through e-mail - [Paras 14, 15] (E-13)

Case Law Cited
Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo
Motu
Writ
Petition
(Crl.)
No.4
of
2021
,reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685, decided
on 31.01.2023 - followed

List of Acts
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; U.P. Jail
Manual, 2002

List of Keywords
Bail application; ss. 137(2) and 87 BNS, 2023;
First information report; Allegation,; Victim;
Statement u/s 183 of BNSS; False implication;
Criminal history; Charge-sheet filed; Custodial
interrogation;
Law-abiding
citizen;
Incarceration; Entitled to enlarged on bail;
Personal bond; Sureties; Conditions of bail;
Cooperate in trial/investigation; Verification of
sureties; Release order; Bail Order Management
System (BOMS), Directions

Case Arising From
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No. - 38294 of 2025

From the Judgment passed in Case Crime No.
314 of 2025, u/ss. 137(2), 87 of BNS, P.S. Saini,
District Kaushambi

Appearances for Parties
Adv. for the Applicant:
Satya Priya Dwivedi

Adv. for the Opposite Party:
G.A.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh
Deshwal, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the
applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and
perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has
been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No.314 of
2025, under Sections-137(2), 87 BNS,
2023,
Police
Station-Saini,
DistrictKaushambi, during the pendency of the
trial.

3. Contention of learned counsel
for the applicant is that that though in the
FIR allegation has been made to entice
away the daughter of first informant but the
victim in her statement u/s 183 of BNSS
has stated that she herself left her house on
her own. Therefore, applicant has been
falsely implicated. It is further submitted
that the applicant has criminal history of
one case. It is further submitted that charge
sheet has been filed in the present case,
therefore, there is no requirement of
custodial interrogation. The applicant is a
482 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
law abiding citizen and he is languishing in
jail since 25.09.2025. In case, he is granted
bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail
and
would
cooperate
in
the
trial
proceedings.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the
prayer for bail but could not dispute the
aforesaid facts.

5. Considering the entire facts and
circumstances of the case, submissions of
learned counsel for the parties and keeping
in view the nature of offence, evidence,
complicity
of
accused
and
without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, I am of the opinion that the applicant
is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

6. Let the applicant- Sohrab alias
Sorab Ali, involved in the aforementioned
crime be released on bail, on his 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 not directly or
indirectly make any 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 to any
police officer or tamper with the evidence.

 ii. The applicant shall cooperate
in the trial/investigation sincerely without
seeking any adjournment.

 iii.
The
applicant
shall
not
indulge
in
any
criminal
activity
or
commission of any crime after being
released on bail.

 iv. The applicant shall attend in
accordance with the conditions of the bond
executed by him.
7. In case of breach of any of the
above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.

8. Identity, status and residence
proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the
bonds are accepted.

9. It is made clear that the applicant
shall be released on the basis of computer
generated copy of this order, downloaded
from the official website of High Court
Allahabad and verified by the concerned
counsel with the undertaking that the
certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

10. It is further directed that the
trial court shall send the release order to the
concerned
jail
through
Bail
Order
Management System (BOMS) to ensure
early release of the applicant.

11. Office is directed to send a
copy of this order to the applicant through
concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or
e-prison portal in compliance of the order
of the Apex Court in the case of Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo
Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021
decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024)
10 SCC 685.

12. This Court further adds that in
several bail matters this Court directed to
Office/Registrar (Compliance) of this Court
to send copy of the bail order to the
accused
applicant
through
Jail
Superintendent
in
pursuance
of
the
direction of the Apex Court in Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail (supra), the
Registrar (Compliance) of the High Court,
Allahabad has informed that for want of
sufficient information in bail application
regarding the jail where the accused-
11 All. Sohrab @ Sorab Ali Vs. State of U.P.
483
applicant is confined, it would be difficult
to directly send copy of bail order to the
accused through Jail Superintendent in
compliance of the direction of the Apex
Court in Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail
(supra). Therefore, he is sending the bail
orders to I.G. of Prisons as well as CJM
concerned to further forward the bail order
to the accused applicant.

13. It is relevant to mention here
that the Apex Court in the case of Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail (supra) has
issued several direction regarding bail
orders including sending the same to
undertrial
or
convict
through
Jail
Superintendent on the same day or on the
next day. Paragraph no.9 of Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail (supra) is
being quoted as under:

 "9. With a view to ameliorate
the problems a number of directions are
sought. We have examined the directions
which we reproduce hereinafter with
certain modifications:

 "(1) The court which grants bail
to an undertrial prisoner/convict would
be required to send a soft copy of the bail
order by email to the prisoner through
the Jail Superintendent on the same day
or the next day. The Jail Superintendent
would be required to enter the date of
grant of bail in the e-prisons software (or
any other software which is being used by
the Prison Department).

 (2) If the accused is not released
within a period of 7 days from the date of
grant of bail, it would be the duty of the
Superintendent of Jail to inform the
Secretary,
DLSA
who
may
depute
paralegal
volunteer
or
jail
visiting
advocate to interact with the prisoner and
assist the prisoner in all ways possible
for his release.

 (3) NIC would make attempts to
create necessary fields in the e-prison software
so that the date of grant of bail and date of
release are entered by the Prison Department
and in case the prisoner is not released within
7 days, then an automatic email can be sent to
the Secretary, DLSA.

 (4) The Secretary, DLSA with a
view to find out the economic condition of the
accused, may take help of the Probation
Officers or the paralegal volunteers to prepare
a report on the socio-economic conditions of
the inmate which may be placed before the
court concerned with a request to relax the
condition(s) of bail/surety.

 (5) In cases where the undertrial or
convict requests that he can furnish bail bond
or sureties once released, then in an
appropriate case, the court may consider
granting temporary bail for a specified period
to the accused so that he can furnish bail bond
or sureties.

 (6) If the bail bonds are not
furnished within one month from the date of
grant of bail, the Court concerned may suo
motu take up the case and consider whether
the
conditions
of
bail
require
modification/relaxation.

 (7) One of the reasons which
delays the release of the accused/convict is
the insistence upon local surety. It is
suggested that in such cases, the courts
may not impose the condition of local
surety."

14. From perusal of the above
quoted order of the Apex Court, it is clear
that there was a specific direction to Jail
484 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Superintendent to enter the date of grant of
bail in e-prison software immediately after
receiving the copy of the bail order, but
because of non-availability of the jail
details, it has become difficult to directly
send copy of bail order to the accusedapplicant. Therefore, it is necessary that
counsel in Allahabad High Court as well as
in Lucknow Bench of this Court, while
filing bail application during trial or during
pendency of appeal, should also mention
the details of jail where the accused
applicant/convict is confined.

15. This Court has also been
apprised by the C.P.C., High Court,
Allahabad that direct access to e-prison
portal through dedicated ID has not been
provided to the Bail Section as well as to
Criminal Appeal Section by the NIC so that
the bail orders could be directly sent to the
jail concerned through e-prison portal
instead of through e-mail.

16. The personal liberty of a person
is a fundamental right under Article 21 of
the Constitution of India. Therefore, a
person cannot be deprived of his liberty,
except the procedure established by law.
Once a Court grants bail to an undertrial or
convict, then it is the right of that undertrial
or convict to know about the bail order
immediately, so that he/she does not remain
confined in jail because of the laxity on the
part of the judicial system or jail
administration or other instrumentality of
the State. The Apex Court also showed its
concern about the liberty of a man who has
been granted bail in the case of Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail (supra).

17. This Court also came across a
number of cases where, for want of
verification
of
sureties,
an
accusedundertrial or convict remains confined in
prison, even after getting the bail from the
concerned court. This Court is also
conscious of the fact that some of the
officials of revenue department as well as
police department are involved in corrupt
practice in the name of verification of
sureties, which is a menace in the
administration of justice. Therefore, it is
also necessary that verification of sureties
should be conducted in the court premises
itself through electronic process, so that the
accused/convict, after getting bail, does not
remain in prison even for a single day.

18. This Court is also conscious of
the fact that despite initiation of sending the
release order through electronic method
(BOMS) in pre-lunch session, the inmates
from the jail are released in the evening
after collecting the release orders, though,
there is no such provision in Jail Manual to
keep the inmates in jail despite receiving
the release order by the jail authority from
the concerned court. On the contrary, Rule91 of the Jail Manual provides for prompt
compliance of release order. Even the
Hon'ble Apex Court also directed to inform
the prisoners about their bail orders through
FASTER system, with the solemn object to
ensure the prompt release of prisoners after
getting bail from the Supreme Court. This
process of FASTER system is also adopted
in U.P. Jail Manual, 2002 by inserting
Rule-92A after the Rule 92. Rule-91 of
U.P. Jail Manual, 2002 is being quoted as
under:

 "91. Orders of release to be
complied with promptly- An order of a
court directing the release of a prisoner
whether convicted or under-trial shall be
carried out with reasonable promptitude
and the prisoner shall ordinarily be
released the same day, unless his further
detention is required by some other
11 All. Sohrab @ Sorab Ali Vs. State of U.P.
485
authority. If the order is received after the
Superintendent has left the jail and it is not
possible to obtain his order without
deferring the release of the prisoner till the
next day, the Jailor should comply with the
order on his own responsibility and obtain
the Superintendent's confirmation of his
action on his next visit to the jail. If,
however, an order directing the release of
a prisoner reaches the prison after 4:30
PM in winter and 5.30 PM in summer
when, according to the prison rules, the
prisoners are shut up for the night, an entry
to that effect shall be made by the officer
in-charge for admission and release, in a
register and a list of names of prisoners
whose release orders are received shall be
displayed outside the jail gate with
appropriate comments.

 All release orders received by
post and confirmed by radiogram shall be
complied on the same day.

 Keeping in view the exigencies of
law and order, the District Magistrate may
allow the compliance of the release order
of a prisoner after locking up of the jail, by
recording the reasons thereof under his
signature and seal and communicate the
same to the Superintendent.

 Note-Allahabad High Court C.L.
No. 42/VIIb-47, dated 28th April, 1978- All
the presiding officers should put their
signatures on the release or remand orders
quite legibly as required under rules 9 and
66 of the G.R. (Criminal). A rubber seal
indicating the name and designation of the
presiding officers and also the name of the
district should invariably affixed to such
orders below their signatures and they
shall ensure that the remand or release
orders are dispatched punctually so as to
reach the jail authority latest by 4:00 p.m.
in winter and 5:00 p.m. in summer."

19. In view of the above fact, it is
necessary to issue following directions,
which are also in the spirit of the directions
issued by the Apex Court in Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail (supra) :

 (i) Advocates are directed to
mention the jail details in the bail
application where the accused applicant or
convict has been under incarceration so as
to enable the Office/Bail Section of this
Court to send the bail orders to the
undertrial/convict-applicant immediately.

 (ii) The Reporting Section of this
Court is directed not to clear any bail
application filed in this Court or its Bench
at Lucknow after 01.12.2025, unless the
detail is mentioned in the bail application
regarding the jail where the applicant is, at
present, under incarceration and notice of
this direction should also be given to
Advocates through Bar Association, High
Court, Allahabad and such notice shall also
be pasted outside the Reporting Section,
apart from notifying the same on the
official website of the High Court of
Judicature at Allahabad.

 (iii) CPC, High Court, Allahabad
will coordinate with the NIC to get direct
access
to
e-prison
portal
through
dedicated ID in concerned criminal
sections so that bail orders from the High
Court can be sent to the applicant
(undertrial or convict) promptly through
the Jail Superintendent, without any
outside interference, which is possible
through e-mail. NIC is also directed to
cooperate with the CPC, High Court,
Allahabad for the aforesaid issue.
486 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
 (iv)
The
Additional
Chief
Secretary (Home), Secretariat, Government
of U.P., Lucknow is directed to issue a
direction to the officials concerned for
ensuring the establishment of electronic
verification of sureties in the district courts'
compound itself in coordination with the
District Judge concerned.

 (v) The Director General (Prison)
is also directed to issue necessary direction
to all prison authorities to release a jail
inmate immediately after receiving the
electronic release order through BOMS
instead of collecting of the release orders
from the Courts and then release the jail
inmates in the evening.

20. Registrar (Compliance) is
directed to send a copy of this order to
Chief Secretary, U.P., Additional Chief
Secretary (Home), Government of U.P.,
Lucknow, Director General (Prison), U.P.,
Deputy Director General, NIC (New
Delhi), CPC, High Court, Allahabad,
Registrar (J) (Criminal), Registrar Criminal
(D),
Stamp
Reporter,
High
Court,
Allahabad and its Bench at Lucknow, for
necessary compliance.
----------
(2025) 11 ILRA 486
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 28.11.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.

Criminal Appeal No. 502 of 1984

Virendra Kumar Goel ...Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant:
Hari Keshav, Sandeep Kumar Singh, Vagish
Kumar Misra

Counsel for the Respondent:
A.G.A.

Issue for consideration
Matter
pertains
to
legality
of
impugned
judgment of conviction for the offence under
Section 27(a)(ii) and 27(b) of the Drugs and
Cosmetics Act, 1940.

Headnotes
Drugs and Cosmetics Act,1940- Appellant
-proprietor of the Arogya Store -used to store
and sell medicines to the general public -on
the prescriptions of the registered medical
practitioners-
the
appellant
has
fully
discharged its burden as mandated u/s 19(A)
and Section 19(3) of the Drugs and Cosmetics
Act-disclosed the complete source of the
medicine- since the complete chain of the
purchase of medicines by the appellant has
been established-it can be safely concluded
that the aforesaid medicines, of which the
sample was taken - were the medicines
produced by the Nectarine Pharmacy- for any
defect, found in the said medicines-the
appellant herein cannot be held to be
responsible-only the manufacturer who is
responsible-impugned judgment set asied.
Appeal allowed. (E-9)

Case Law Cited
Nil

List of Acts
Drugs and Cosmetics Act,1940

List of Keywords
Discharged its burden as mandated u/s 19(A)
and Section 19(3) of the Drugs and Cosmetics
Act

Appearances of parties
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Hari Keshav, Sandeep
Kumar Singh, Vagish Kumar Misra Counsel for
Respondent(s) : A.G.A.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Anish Kumar
Gupta, J.)