Allahabad HC Grants Bail to Accused in BNS Sections 152 and 197 Case Over Alleged Pro-Pakistan Social Media Posts

Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal granted bail to Asharaf Khan, citing zero trial progress since charge framing, speedy trial rights, and parity with a co-accused already released on bail.

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad has granted bail to Asharaf Khan, also known as Nisrat, who has been in custody since 13 May 2025 in connection with Case Crime No. 194 of 2025 registered at Police Station Sasani Kotwari, District Hathras. The offences alleged against him are under Sections 152 and 197 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, sitting singly at Court No. 66, allowed the second bail application after finding that not a single prosecution witness had been examined by the trial court despite charges having been framed, that a co-accused had already received bail from a coordinate bench, and that the applicant's right to a speedy trial had been infringed.

The Charges and the Applicant's Custody

Asharaf Khan was booked under Sections 152 and 197 BNS in Case Crime No. 194 of 2025. The State's case, as placed before the court, was that he had made viral an objectionable post regarding India's defeat by Pakistan, had posted the slogan “Pakistan Jindabad” despite being an Indian citizen, and had thereby acted in a manner prejudicial to national integration and encouraging separatist activities.

The applicant has been in jail since 13 May 2025. Charges in the case were framed on 14 February 2025. His first bail application, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 20227 of 2025, was rejected by this Court on 2 July 2025. The present application, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41516 of 2025, was the second such application.

What the Applicant Argued

Sri Saiyad Iqbal Ahmed, appearing for the applicant, advanced three principal contentions. First, he submitted that there was no material on record to show that the applicant had himself forwarded the objectionable messages or posts. Second, despite charges being framed on 14 February 2025, not a single witness had been examined by the trial court, violating the applicant's fundamental right to a speedy trial. Third, co-accused Shahrukh Khan had been granted bail by a coordinate bench of this Court on 4 August 2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19917 of 2025, and the applicant was entitled to release on the ground of parity.

Counsel also pointed out that the trial was ongoing and there was therefore no requirement for custodial interrogation. The applicant had no criminal history. An undertaking was offered that, if released, he would neither post nor circulate any objectionable content prejudicial to national interest, would not misuse bail, and would cooperate in trial proceedings.

State's Opposition

The Additional Government Advocate, Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, opposed bail. He submitted that the applicant had made the objectionable post viral, disrespecting the armed forces, the Prime Minister and the Defence Minister, and had posted the slogan “Pakistan Jindabad.” According to the State, the act not only carried an imputation prejudicial to national integration but fell in the category of conduct encouraging separatist activities. On those grounds, the State urged that bail be refused.

How the Court Reasoned

Justice Deshwal weighed several factors together. The applicant had been in custody since 13 May 2025. Charges were framed on 14 February 2025. Despite that, no witness had been examined before the trial court. The court treated the absence of any trial progress as a significant consideration, observing that the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right of an accused.

The court also took note of the allegation that it was co-accused Shahrukh Khan who had made the objectionable video viral, and that Shahrukh Khan had already been released on bail by a coordinate bench. Given that the same or similar allegation of making the content viral was directed at the co-accused, the principle of parity weighed in favour of the applicant.

The bench further considered the overcrowding of jails and the heavy pendency of criminal cases before trial courts. The court placed reliance on the Supreme Court's judgment in Kapil Wadhawan v Central Bureau of Investigation, reported at 2025 SCC Online SC 3038, and on the guideline of the Allahabad High Court in Maya Tiwari v State of U.P., reported at 2024 SCC Online All 6765, both of which address the grant of bail. The court was careful to state that it expressed no opinion on the merits of the case.

Taking the nature of the offence, the evidence, the complicity of the accused, the period of custody, the absence of any trial progress, and the parity with the co-accused collectively into account, Justice Deshwal concluded that the applicant was entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Conditions Attached to Bail

The court imposed a detailed set of conditions. The applicant must furnish a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the concerned court. Beyond the standard conditions — not tampering with evidence, cooperating in the trial without seeking adjournments, not committing any offence while on bail, and attending as required under the bond — the court imposed a condition specific to the nature of the case: the applicant shall not post any material on social media that may tend to encourage feelings of separatism or be prejudicial to any particular community. Breach of any condition will be a ground for cancellation of bail.

The court further directed that identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the concerned court before bonds are accepted, and that mobile numbers and Aadhaar cards of the applicant and sureties be verified.

Administrative Directions

Justice Deshwal directed that the trial court send the release order to the concerned jail through the Bail Order Management System (BOMS). The office was directed to transmit a copy of the order to the applicant through the Hathras Jail Superintendent via e-mail or the e-prison portal and to the trial court by e-mode, within 24 hours. These directions were issued in compliance with orders of the Supreme Court in the suo motu matter on policy strategy for grant of bail as well as in Pila Pahan @ Peela Pahan and others v State of Jharkhand and another.

Order

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41516 of 2025 was allowed. Asharaf Khan @ Nisrat is to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 194 of 2025 under Sections 152 and 197 BNS, Police Station Sasani Kotwari, District Hathras, on furnishing the required bonds and complying with the conditions set out in the order dated 14 July 2026.