Allahabad High Court
AMAN ALIAS KISHAN VISHVAKARMAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that, in view of the delay, lack of substantive identification by the witness, parity with the co‑accused, and applicable Supreme Court precedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Aman alias Kishan Vishvakarma, who is charged under IPC sections 302, 394, 411, 120B and 34 for a crime alleged to have occurred in Varanasi. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR, that key evidence (blood‑stained brick, hammer and jewellery) was recovered only after his and co‑accused Aditya's statements, and that the sole witness PW‑1 denied identifying the jewellery, while only 2 of 37 witnesses had been examined, violating his right to a speedy trial. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the facts. Relying on recent Supreme Court judgments (Sahil Manoj Machare, Kapil Wadhawan, Maya Tiwari) and the fact that the co‑accused had already been released on bail, the court held that the applicant is entitled to bail, subject to standard conditions. The order directs verification of identity, sureties, and procedural steps for release, and urges the trial court to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving serious IPC offences given the delay in trial and limited evidentiary material.
- Whether the applicant's non‑inclusion in the FIR and the witness's denial of identification affect the bail decision.
- Whether parity with a co‑accused who has been released on bail mandates granting bail to the applicant.
- How recent Supreme Court precedents on bail and the right to a speedy trial apply to the present case.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 302, 34, 394, 411
Subjects
- bail
- right to speedy trial
- IPC offences
- parity principle
- evidence evaluation
- overcrowded prisons
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14157 of 2026
Aman Alias Kishan Vishvakarma
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajiv Chowdhury
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Rajiv Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Himanshu Kumar, 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.181 of 2022, under Section-
302, 394, 411, 120B, 34 IPC, Police Station-Lanka, District-Varanasi,
during the pendency of the trial.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant
was not named in the FIR. Subsequently, the applicant and co-
accused Aditya were arrested during investigation and on pointing out
of the co-accused Aditya, blood stained brick was recovered and
blood stained hammer was recovered on pointing out of the present
applicant and subsequently, the jewellery was also shown to be
recovered from the joint declaration of the applicant as well as the co-
accused Aditya. The aforesaid jewellery was allegedly identified by
the PW-1. However, PW-1 in his statement before the court clearly
denied of having identified any jewellery recovered by the police. It is
further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 2022 and out of 37
witnesses, only 2 witnesses have been examined before the trial
court. Therefore, right to speedy trial of the applicant has been
infringed. Therefore, in view of the latest judgement of the Apex Court
in the case of Sahil Manoj Machare Vs. State of Maharashtra in
SLP (Crl.) No.7502 of 2026, applicant is entitled to be released on
bail. It is further submitted that even otherwise the co-accused Aditya,
who is also on similar footing as of the applicant has already been
BAIL No. 14157 of 2026
2
released on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc.
Bail Application No.20223 of 2025 vide order dated 18.06.2025.
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 one case 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 abiding citizen and he is
languishing in jail since 01.09.2022. 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. has 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 applicant- Aman alias Kishan Vishvakarma, 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.
BAIL No. 14157 of 2026
3
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 and Aadhaar card of the applicant as
well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
10. 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.
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 applicant.
12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant
through Varanasi 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.
13. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial, as expeditiously as
possible, if required, by using video conferencing facility for the
appearance of witnesses.
May 6, 2026
S.C.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM CHAURASIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…