Allahabad High Court
RASHIDversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted because the applicant was specifically alleged to have assaulted the deceased with a knife, a claim supported by eye‑witnesses and a blood‑stained weapon.
Summary
The applicant, Rashid, sought bail in a trial for offences under Sections 302, 323 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code relating to a murder alleged to have occurred in Aligarh. He argued that he had been falsely implicated, that there were no eye‑witnesses, and that his right to a speedy trial was violated after four years of incarceration with only eight witnesses examined. The State contended that several eye‑witnesses identified the applicant as the assailant, a blood‑stained knife was recovered on his pointing, and the post‑mortem report confirmed death by neck injury. The court examined the submissions and noted the specific allegation of the applicant cutting the deceased's neck, corroborated by eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence. Considering these material facts, the court concluded that the applicant did not merit bail. Consequently, the bail application was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a murder case where eye‑witnesses and forensic evidence link the accused to the crime
- Whether the accused's claim of a violated right to speedy trial warrants bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 323, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC 302
- IPC 323
- IPC 34
- eye witness
- forensic evidence
- speedy trial
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14596 of 2026
Rashid
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Lal Bahadur, Upendra Kumar Pushkar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Himanshu Kumar, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 49 of 2022, under
Sections 302, 323, 34 IPC, Police Station- Rorawar, District Aligarh.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case though there is no eye witness
of the incident. The applicant is in jail for more than four years and only 8
witnesses have been examined till date. Therefore, the applicant is entitled
to be released on bail during trial, as his right to speedy trial has been
infringed due to non-completion of the trial. The applicant has explained
the criminal history of one case. In case, he is granted bail, he will not
misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail and submitted that there is eye witnesses of the
incident, who clearly stated and supported the FIR version and also stated
that the applicant cut the neck of the deceased with knife and on pointing
out of the applicant a blood stained knife was also recovered. It is further
submitted that post mortem report also shows that the cause of death of
deceased is injury on his neck, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to
be released on bail.
BAIL No. 14596 of 2026
2
5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and
taking into account the fact that there is specific allegation against the
applicant for assaulting the deceased with knife which was witnessed by
several eye witnesses coupled with the fact that a blood stained knife was
also recovered on pointing out of the applicant, therefore, this Court is not
inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
6. Accordingly, the present bail application is rejected.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
May 7, 2026
A.Kr.
Digitally signed by :-
AJAY KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…