Allahabad High Court
LALDHAR YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that, despite the seriousness of the offence, the applicant is entitled to bail because the trial is at the stage of Section 313 Cr.P.C., he has been in pre‑trial detention for more than three years, and Supreme Court guidelines on bail and the right to a fair defence outweigh the prosecution’s case.
Summary
Laldhar Yadav, accused under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC for murder, applied for bail after being in custody since November 2022. The first bail application was rejected on the ground that he was the main accused. The applicant argued that most prosecution witnesses had already been examined and that his prolonged pre‑trial detention violated his right to a fair defence. The State contended that eye‑witnesses and the post‑mortem report implicated the applicant and that the trial was nearing conclusion. Relying on Supreme Court precedents emphasizing the right to bail, the need to avoid excessive pre‑trial detention, and the stage of the trial (Section 313 Cr.P.C.), the court granted bail with standard conditions. The order also directed procedural steps for verification of sureties and electronic transmission of the bail order.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused of murder (IPC 302) when the trial is at the stage of Section 313 Cr.P.C.
- Whether the applicant's prolonged pre‑trial detention of over three years violates his right to a fair defence and speedy trial.
- Whether the Supreme Court’s guidelines on bail in Kapil Wadhawan and Maya Tiwari apply to this case.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 161, 313
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- pre‑trial detention
- IPC 302
- Criminal Procedure Code
- right to speedy trial
- overcrowded prisons
- Supreme Court bail guidelines
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43710 of 2025
Laldhar Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Kamlesh Kumar Yadav
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Amit Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the first informant, and Sri
Ram Kumar Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 315 of 2022, under
Sections 302/34 IPC, Police Station- Taranwa, District Azamgarh
3. This is second bail application. The first bail application was rejected
on 24.04.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12128 of 2024 on
the ground that the applicant is main accused.
4. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the first
informant was eye witnesses and it appears that the statement was
recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He further submitted that the
applicant is in jail since 17.11.2022 and till date trial has not been
concluded. He further submitted that out of total 15 witness, 10 witnesses
have been examined, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail .
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant as well as
learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted
that specific role has been assigned to the applicant by the several eye
witnesses and post mortem report shows that the applicant repeatedly
assaulted the deceased which shows his intention and trial is almost
concluded. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
BAIL No. 43710 of 2025
2
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions
of learned counsel for the parties and taking into account of the fact that
almost all the prosecution witnesses have been examined and case is at
the stage of 313 Cr.P.C. The prosecution story shows that it was a sudden
quarrel took place between the daughter of the applicant and deceased and
the applicant, at the spur of moment, attack the deceased. The applicant is
in jail for more than three and half years and for effective defence
opportunity is required to be given to the applicant as per the judgement
of the Apex Court and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence,
complicity of accused 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.
7. Let the applicant- Laldhar Yadav 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.
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.
BAIL No. 43710 of 2025
3
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
10. Verification of mobile number as well as Aadhaar Card of the
applicant and sureties should also be conducted by the court concerned.
11. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
downloaded copy of this order 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.
12. It is 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.
13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal 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.
14. Application, if any, stands disposed of.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
May 15, 2026
A.Kr.
Digitally signed by :-
AJAY KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…