Allahabad High Court
NANDKISHORversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
In the absence of a specific role assigned to the accused and considering the nature of injuries, the accused is entitled to bail.
Summary
The accused Nandkishor applied for bail in a case (Crime No. 156 of 2026) alleging assault on the informant's family members, resulting in injuries including a fatal fracture to Kailash. The prosecution argued that the injuries were severe and that a co-accused had used an iron rod, seeking denial of bail. The defense highlighted that no specific role was assigned to Nandkishor, he has no prior criminal record, and the charge sheet does not implicate him directly in the gravest injury. After considering the submissions and the nature of the injuries, the court concluded that the accused is entitled to bail. Accordingly, bail was granted on personal bond and sureties, referencing Supreme Court precedents on bail policy.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused, who is not specifically linked to the fatal injury, is eligible for bail despite serious injuries to the victim.
- Whether the seriousness of the injuries and the alleged use of an iron rod by a co‑accused preclude bail.
- How the Supreme Court’s bail guidelines in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and related policy should be applied.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 109(1), 115(2), 351(3), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- injury
- no prior criminal record
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33916 of 2026
Nandkishor
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravindra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Ravindra Singh, learned counsel for the accused applicant,
Mrs. Rukmaki Ojha, learned counsel for the informant and learned
A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Nandkishor to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 156 of 2026, under
Sections 115(2), 109(1), 352, 351(3) of BNS, P.S.- Rajpura, District-
Sambhal during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for accused applicant that the
accused applicant has been implicated in FIR dated 23.7.2026 lodged
against five persons including the accused applicant by one Mahesh with
the allegation that all the accused had assaulted the family members of the
informant, namely, Manju and Kailash. It is further contended that during
investigation, the name of Kamlesh has also been figured out, whose
medical examination has been carried out, although, he has not been
shown as an injured either in the FIR or in the prosecution case. It is
further contended that omnibus allegations have been levelled against the
accused persons that they have assaulted the injured with lathi, danda and
iron rod. It is further contended that only Kailash suffered fracture on the
frontal bone, rest other, suffered simple injuries. The point of contention
between the parties was that injured Kailash was constructing his house
when the incident took place. The charge sheet is submited. The accused
applicant has no criminal history. He is languishing in jail since
BAIL No. 33916 of 2026
2
13.08.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have opposed
the bail and submits that doctor's statement is clear and explicit that
injuries sustained by Kailash are fatal to life. There is specific role
assigned to the co-accused Arjun that he has assaulted with iron rod. As
such, submits that the bail application should be rejected.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering the nature and number of injuries on the person of injured
and no specific role assigned to the accused applicant, the accused
applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is
allowed.
8. The accused/applicant 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 court concerned in view of observation made by the
Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in
re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and
speedy disposal.
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
September 23, 2026
Abhishek Sri.
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…