Allahabad High Court
KADEERversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The bail application is allowed; the applicant is entitled to be released on bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Kadeer, who is named in an FIR for murder under Sections 191(2), 190, 103(1) and 3(5) of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant claimed the allegations were false, pointing to a post‑mortem report that showed a single head injury and no direct evidence linking him to the death, and argued that the case did not go beyond Section 105 (lack of intent to cause death). The State argued that the applicant was the prime accused due to a pending dispute with the deceased. The Court noted that the co‑accused brothers had already been released on bail and that the applicant’s other criminal cases were of minor nature. Weighing the lack of direct evidence, the applicant’s custody since May 2026, and the precedent of bail to co‑accused, the Court held that bail was appropriate. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to a personal bond, two sureties and standard conditions, without expressing any view on the merits of the murder charge.
Issues considered
- Whether the evidence, including the post‑mortem report, establishes the applicant’s participation in the murder sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether the case proceeds beyond Section 105 of the IPC, i.e., whether intent to cause death is proved.
- Whether the applicant’s prior criminal history and the bail granted to co‑accused affect the grant of bail.
- Whether the conditions of the bail order satisfy the requirements under the Criminal Procedure Code.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 103(1), 105, 190, 191(2), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 191
- Section 190
- Section 103
- Section 3(5)
- Section 105
- post‑mortem report
- criminal history
- High Court of Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29571 of 2026
Kadeer
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Araf Khan, Lihazur Rahman Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Nikhil Kumar Yadav, G.A.
Court No. - 65
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Short counter affidavit filed by the informant and supplementary
affidavit filed by the applicant are taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Araf Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nikhil
Kumar Yadav, 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.258 of 2026, under Sections 191(2),
190, 103(1), 3(5) BNS, Police Station Quarsi, District Aligarh during
pendency of the trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however applicant is named
in the FIR alongwith others and as per allegation he was having enmity
with the deceased and due to enmity he along with others by causing lathi
injury committed his murder but entire allegations levelled against the
applicant are totally false.
5. He next submits, postmortem report suggests, deceased sustained single
injury on his head and there is no evidence that applicant is author of this
injury.
6. He next submits, even from the postmortem report it reflects, present
case does not travel beyond Section 105 BNS as it could not be reflected
that applicant was having any intention to cause death of the deceased.
BAIL No. 29571 of 2026
2
7. He further submits, other co-accused who were brothers of applicant
have already been released on bail by this Court and considering the
allegation of assault case of applicant is at par with them and their bail
order have been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit dated
19.09.2026.
8. He further argued, however apart from the present case applicant is
having criminal history of three other cases but his criminal history has
been explained and all the cases were of minor nature and in one case
even closure report has been submitted. He next submits, in the present
matter applicant is in jail since 08.05.2026.
9. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for informant
opposed the prayer for bail and submit, applicant appears to be prime
accused as he was having motive to commit the instant crime as his
dispute was pending with the deceased but could not dispute the other
argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of
the case.
11. However, applicant is named in the FIR alongwith his brothers and as
per allegation he alongwith his brothers committed murder of the
deceased and from the record it also reflects, applicant was having enmity
with the deceased but postmortem report suggests, deceased sustained
only single injury on his head and there is no evidence that applicant is
author of this injury.
12. Further, even considering the postmortem report the argument
advanced by learned counsel for the applican that prima facie present case
does not travel beyond Section 105 BNS cannot be ruled out.
13. Further, even co-accused who were brothers of applicant have already
been released on bail by this Court and as far as allegation of assault is
concerned case of applicant is at par with them.
14. Further, however apart from the present case applicant is having
criminal history of three other cases but his criminal history has been
BAIL No. 29571 of 2026
3
explained and all the cases were of minor nature and in one case even
after investigation no charge sheet could be filed and in that case closure
report has been submitted by the I.O.
15. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 08.05.2026.
16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case
discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, the instant bail application is allowed.
18. Let the applicant - Kadeer 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.
19. 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.
20. 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 21, 2026
Shahroz
Digitally signed by :-
SHAHROJ ALAM
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…