Allahabad High Court
ROHITversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
Rohit, accused under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1), 238 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(5) of the B.N.S., applied for bail while the trial was pending. His first bail plea was rejected, but a co‑accused, Krishna, had been released on bail on similar factual grounds. Rohit argued that his role and the evidence against him were identical to Krishna’s and that he had no prior criminal record, making parity a valid ground for bail. The State opposed the application but did not dispute the factual matrix. Relying on the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Kapil Wadhawan v CBI, Maya Tiwari v State of U.P., and other recent pronouncements, the court held that Rohit was entitled to bail, imposed standard conditions, and ordered his release.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant Rohit is entitled to bail on the ground of parity with the co‑accused Krishna.
- Whether the nature of the offence, evidence and the pendency of trial justify the grant of bail.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of criminal history and the overcrowding of jails warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 3(5)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 103(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 238
Subjects
- bail
- parity principle
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal procedure
- overcrowded prisons
- trial pendency
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32363 of 2026
Rohit
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Roshan Kumar Singh, 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. 01/2025, Under Sections-
191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1), 238, 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Binauli,
District Baghpat, during the pendency of the trial.
3. This is a second bail application.
4. First bail application no.10709 of 2026 was rejected by this court
on 21.05.2026.
5. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the first bail
application of the applicant was rejected on the ground that his role is
distinguishable from the co-accused Krishna, who had been released
on bail by this court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.943 of 2026
on 27.01.2026. It is further submitted that correct fact is that from the
record, it is clear that role of the applicant Krishna is absolutely
similar and nature of evidence are also similar as on pointing out of
the applicant as well as the co-accused Krishna, alleged body of
deceased was recovered after being exhumed from pit and two blood
stained sickles were recovered from the applicant as well as the co-
accused Krishna but while arguing the first bail application, the earlier
counsel could not bring on record the correct fact before this Court,
for that reason, the first bail application of the applicant was rejected
BAIL No. 32363 of 2026
2
on 21.05.2026. It is further submitted that the applicant has no
criminal history. It is further submitted that charge sheet has been
filed in the present case, therefore, there is no requirement of
custodial interrogation. The role of the applicant is similar to the co-
accused, Krishna, therefore, applicant is also entitled to be released
on bail on the ground of parity with Krishna. It is further submitted that
charges were framed on 23.05.2025 but till date, not a single witness
has been examined, therefore, trial is not likely to be concluded in
near future. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.01.2025. In
case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and
would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
7. 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, parity of
the applicant with co-accused Krishna, who has been released on
bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.943 of 2026 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. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant- Rohit, 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. 32363 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.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.
10. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties
be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
11. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant
as well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant
through Baghpat Jail Superintendent via e-mail or on e-prison
portal and Trial Court via e-mode 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 as well as Pila Pahan @
Peela Pahan and others Vs. State of Jharkhand and another, in
Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 169 of 2025, decided on 29.05.2026.
September 14, 2026
S.C.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM CHAURASIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…