Allahabad High Court
WARISversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail as there is no specific allegation against him and the pre‑trial detention is excessive, despite the homicide context.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Waris, who was accused in a homicide case (Crime No. 412 of 2025) involving the death of his sister‑in‑law. Waris argued that he was implicated solely on false allegations, had no involvement in the family dispute, and had been in custody for over eight months. The prosecution presented a post‑mortem report indicating nine injuries and death by neck compression, suggesting a homicidal death, but could not point to a specific charge against Waris. The court noted Waris’s relationship to the deceased (unmarried devar), lack of direct allegation, and his minor prior offence, and found the prolonged pre‑trial detention unjustified. Consequently, the court granted bail with conditions, without commenting on the merits of the underlying homicide case.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Sections 80(2), 85, 103(1), 3(5) of the BNS Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act despite the nature of the alleged homicide.
- Whether the applicant's familial relationship to the deceased and absence of a specific allegation against him affect bail eligibility.
- Whether the length of pre‑trial detention (more than eight months) warrants the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- homicide
- pre‑trial detention
- family relationship
- criminal history
- BNS Act
- DP Act
- Allahabad High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23871 of 2026
Waris
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Punita Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Pankaj Bharti
Court No. - 65
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Rejoinder affidavit filed by the applicant is taken on record.
2. Heard Ms. Shweta Pandey, advocate holding brief of Ms. Punita
Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Bharti, learned
counsel for the informant and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA for the
State.
3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No.412 of 2025, under Sections 80(2), 85,
103(1), 3(5) BNS and Section 3/4 DP Act, Police Station Bhopa, District
Muzaffarnagar, during pendency of the trial.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits, applicant is
brother-in-law i.e. devar of the deceased and on the basis of false
allegation he has been made accused in the present matter. She next
submits, being unmarried devar of the deceased applicant was not having
any concern with the family affairs of the deceased.
5. She further submits, actually dispute was pending between husband and
wife i.e. deceased and it reflects, on the date of incident husband of the
deceased badly beaten her and thereafter compressed her neck due to
which she died and after her death applicant, being younger brother of
applicant, has also been made accused in the present matter.
6. She further submits, however apart from the present case applicant is
having criminal history of one another case but that case relates to
BAIL No. 23871 of 2026
2
cheating.
7. She further submits, in the present matter he is in jail since 12.01.2026
i.e. for last eight months.
8. She further argued, therefore considering the facts of the case, applicant
may be enlarged on bail.
9. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant
opposed the prayer for bail and submit, postmortem report of the deceased
suggests, she sustained as many as nine injuries and as per autopsy
surgeon she died due to compression of neck therefore prima facie it
appears to be a case of homicidal death but could not dispute the fact that
applicant is unmarried devar of the deceased and there is no specific
allegation against him. They also could not dispute the fact that in the
present matter applicant is in jail for last more than eight months.
10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of
the case.
11. However, from the postmortem report it reflects, deceased who was
bhabhi of applicant, sustained as many as nine injuries and she died due
to compression of neck but applicant is her unmarried devar and there is
no specific allegation against him. Considering the fact that applicant is
devar of the deceased, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the
applicant that being devar of the deceased applicant was not having any
concern with her family affairs and only due to this reason he has been
made accused cannot be ruled out at this stage.
12. Further, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal
history of one another case but that case relates to minor offense.
13. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 12.01.2026 i.e.
for last more than eight months.
14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case
discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
BAIL No. 23871 of 2026
3
case, the instant bail application is allowed.
16. Let the applicant - Waris be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
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 appear before the trial court on the dates fixed,
unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer
or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social
activity.
17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will
be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of
the bail of the applicant.
18. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts
brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and
the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case
during trial.
(Sameer Jain,J.)
September 28, 2026
Shahroz
Digitally signed by :-
SHAHROJ ALAM
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…