Allahabad High Court
SUSHIL KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicants are entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Sushil Kumar and Vishnu (Vinay) in a murder case (Sections 302 and 201 IPC) where the deceased was reported missing in July 2023 and a skeleton was recovered in May 2024. The DNA report presented by the A.G. showed a partial profile that did not match the deceased’s relatives, and the court noted that there was no conclusive evidence linking the skeleton to the victim. The applicants argued that they were falsely implicated due to personal disputes and had been in custody since May 2024 without any material suggesting their guilt. Citing the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI (2025) and Maya Tiwari v. State of U.P. (2024), as well as concerns of jail overcrowding, the court granted bail without commenting on the merits of the case. The bail was ordered on the condition of personal bond, sureties, and compliance with several procedural safeguards.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a murder case (Sections 302 and 201 IPC) given the lack of conclusive forensic evidence linking the victim’s body to the deceased.
- Whether the procedural safeguards and precedents on bail for serious offences justify release pending trial.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC 302
- IPC 201
- DNA evidence
- overcrowded prisons
- presumption of innocence
- trial pending
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11017 of 2025
Sushil Kumar And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pankaj Sharma, Prashant Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Azhar Hussain, G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Pankaj Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Azhar
Hussain, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra,
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
applicants on bail in Case Crime No.232 of 2024, under Sections- 302,
201 IPC, Police Station- Trans Yamuna, District- Agra, during the
pendency of the trial.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that as per the
prosecution story deceased was missing since 16.07.2023, thereafter,
missing report was filed to the police on 05.09.2023 and on the basis of
suspicion police arrested the applicants and on their pointing out human
skeleton was recovered on 11.05.2024, thereafter, FIR was lodged on
13.06.2024 and the allegation has been made against the applicant and co-
accused for killing the deceased. In pursuance to the order of this Court
dated 14.11.2025, DNA report regarding recovered skeleton of the
deceased was produced by the learned AGA, which shows because of
partial generation of DNA profile. The report shows the DNA of deceased
does not match with his brother Kamlesh and his daughter Mansi,
however, it transpires that skeleton belongs to a male . It is further
submitted that as on date there is no material on record which can suggest
that recovered skeleton belongs to the deceased even otherwise there is no
evidence showing that the deceased was last in the company of the
BAIL No. 11017 of 2025
2
applicants and applicants have been falsely implicated in the present
matter because of having some disputes with the deceased. It is further
submitted that the applicant no.1 has explained the criminal history of one
case and applicant no.2 has explained the criminal history of two cases. It
is further submitted that trial is going on, therefore, there is no
requirement of custodial interrogation.The applicants are law abiding
citizen and they are languishing in jail since 12.05.2024. In case, they are
granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate
in the trial proceedings.
4. Learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. have
vehemently 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 the accused and taking into account
overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial
courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex
Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of
Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 as well as
guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P.
reported in 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail 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 applicants- Sushil Kumar and Vishnu @ Vinay, involved in
the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on their 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 applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police
officer or tamper with the evidence.
ii. The applicants shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely
without seeking any adjournment.
BAIL No. 11017 of 2025
3
iii. The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or
commission of any crime after being released on bail.
iv. The applicants shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the
bond executed by them.
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 applicants and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
9. Verification of Aadhaar card as well as mobile number of the
applicants and sureties should also be conducted by the court concerned.
10. It is made clear that the applicants 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.
11. 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 applicants.
12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicants through
concerned jail superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal within 24 hours
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.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
April 27, 2026
S.A.
Digitally signed by :-
SALMAN AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…