Allahabad High Court
ABHI KHATRI ALIAS ABHISHEKversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that, considering parity with co‑accused, the absence of direct eyewitness evidence, and relevant Supreme Court precedents, the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Abhi Khatri (Abhishek) in a murder case (Crime No. 1184 of 2025) under CrPC sections 103(1), 190 and 191. The applicant argued that the prosecution’s case was based solely on a non‑eyewitness statement implicating him, that the co‑accused had already been released on bail, and that there was no weapon recovered from him. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the parity with co‑accused. Relying on the principle of parity, the lack of direct evidence, the Supreme Court’s recent judgments, and the need to decongest prisons, the court allowed the bail application. The applicant was ordered to be released on personal bond with two sureties and subject to standard bail conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the applicant during trial under CrPC sections 103(1), 190 and 191(2), 191(3) given the nature of evidence.
- Whether the applicant’s alleged involvement, based only on a non‑eyewitness statement, warrants denial of bail.
- Whether parity with co‑accused already released on bail and Supreme Court precedents justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 103(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3)
Subjects
- bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- parity
- evidence
- overcrowded prisons
- Supreme Court precedent
- murder trial
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12310 of 2026
Abhi Khatri Alias Abhishek
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Madan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Mahendra Kumar Singh Chauhan
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Madan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mahendra Kumar
Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Anand Pratap Singh,
learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during
the trial in Case Crime No. 1184 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3)
BNS, Police Station- Majhola, District Moradabad.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that as per the prosecution story,
co-accused Mayank came to the house of the first informant and took away the
deceased for some work with the assurance that he will return after sometime.
Thereafter, the uncle of the deceased, Jagatpal informed the first informant that the
accused has killed the deceased. It is further submitted that from bare perusal of the
statement of Jagatpal, it is clear that he was not the eye witness and no other person
had seen the incident in question and he has falsely implicated the applicant only on
the ground that he had seen the applicant along with the co-accused running away near
the place of incident. It is further submitted that in the statement of the first informant
as well as in the statement of Jagatpal, it is clear that the motive has been assigned to
co-accused Prashant Saini and applicant has been falsely implicated merely on the
basis of apprehension and doubt. There is no recovery of any weapon from the
applicant and a country-made pistol has been recovered from the co-accused, Prashant
Saini. The cause of death shows that it is because of the firearm injury. He further
submitted that co-accused Mohan, Yash Saini and Bheem Sain having similar role to
that of the applicant, have been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No.10320 of 2026, 8812 of 2026 and 7335 of 2026 vide order dated
26.03.2026, 16.03.2026 and 26.02.2026 respectively. Therefore, the applicant is also
entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. It is further submitted that the
applicant has explained the criminal history of two cases in the accompanying
affidavit. 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 law
BAIL No. 12310 of 2026
2
abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 09.12.2025. In case, he is granted
bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not
dispute the parity of the applicant with co-accused, who have been enlarged on bail by
this Court.
5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned
counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that similarly situated co-
accused has been enlarged on bail and keeping in view the nature of offence,
evidence, complicity of 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 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. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.
6. Let the applicant- Abhi Khatri @ Abhishek 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. Verification of mobile number as well as Aadhaar Card of the applicant and sureties
should also be conducted by the court concerned.
9. It is made clear that 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
BAIL No. 12310 of 2026
3
days.
10. It is 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.
April 20, 2026
A.Kr.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
AJAY KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…