Allahabad High Court
DHANANJAY SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Dhananjay Singh, who is charged with offences including assault and causing death under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 117(2) and 103(1) BNS. The incident involved the assault of three persons, one of whom, Chandrika Singh, died 45 days later from septicemic shock due to chest trauma. The prosecution argued that the accused participated in the assault, while the defence highlighted that the FIR does not assign a specific role to the applicant and that a similarly situated co‑accused, Gulab Singh, had already been granted bail. The court noted the applicant's limited criminal history, the slow progress of the trial, and the broader concerns of jail overcrowding, relying on precedents from the Supreme Court. Without expressing a view on the merits, the court held that the applicant is entitled to bail, subject to standard conditions and verification of sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to Dhananjay Singh under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, given the nature of the offences and the evidence.
- Whether the applicant's role in the assault can be distinguished from that of co‑accused Gulab Singh, who was previously granted bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- homicide
- jail overcrowding
- evidentiary insufficiency
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 483
- co‑accused bail
- postmortem
- septicemic shock
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43850 of 2025
Dhananjay Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Kumar Kanaujiya, Jai Prakash Singh,
Pankaj Kumar Shukla, Sahab Tiwari, Sanjay
Kumar Pal, Saurabh Tiwari, Sita Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ghan Shyam Yadav, Nikhil Tripathi
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ghan Shyam
Yadav, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri B.P. Maurya, learned AGA for the
State-respondents and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on
bail in Case Crime No. 282 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 117(2),
103(1) BNS registered at Police Station Rasra, District Ballia during pendency of the
trial.
3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-
accused Gulab Singh has already been granted by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide order dated 24.6.2026 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 11689 of 2026.
It is next submitted that applicant and co-accused Gulab Singh and Khadak Singh are
said to have assaulted Chandrika Singh, Suryanath Singh and Janardan Singh. It is
next submitted that the injured Chandrika Singh died after 45 days of the incident and
his cause of death has been shown in the postmortem report as septicemic shock due
to antecedent chest trauma and he died due to negligence in treatment. It is submitted
that during investigation, injured witnesses including the deceased have not assigned
any specific role to the applicant and only general and omnibus roles have been
assigned to all the accused persons. It is further submitted that applicant has criminal
history of one case in which he is on bail and he has been languishing in jail since
03.9.2025 and till date, only one prosecution witness has been examined by the trial
court, therefore, trial is not likely to conclude in near future.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for
grant of bail to the applicant and submits that applicant and other co-accused persons
have assaulted Chandrika Singh, Suryanath Singh and Janardan Singh and all of them
including the deceased have stated before the Investigating Officer that applicant and
BAIL No. 43850 of 2025
2
two other accused persons assaulted them. It is further submitted that co-accused
Gulab Singh has been granted bail but he is a person of old age.
5. Learned AGA also opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant on the same
line.
6. As per the FIR, applicant and co-accused Gulab Singh and Khadak Singh are said to
have assaulted Chandrika Singh, Suryanath Singh and Janardan Singh, however, they
have not been assigned any weapon in the FIR. One of the injured Chandrika Singh
died after 45 days of the incident and as per postmortem report, cause of his death has
been shown as septicemic shock due to ante mortem chest trauma. During
investigation, the injured witnesses including the deceased have not assigned any
specific role to the applicant and general and omnibus role have been assigned to all
the accused persons. Similarly placed co-accused Gulab Singh has already been
granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Cour and role of the applicant is not
distinguishable from the role of aforesaid accused person. Applicant has criminal
history of one case in which he is on bail and he has been languishing in jail since
03.9.2025. Till date, only one prosecution witness has been examined by the trial
court, therefore, trial is not likely to conclude in near future.
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 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.
8. Let the applicant Dhananjay Singh 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
BAIL No. 43850 of 2025
3
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. Verification of mobile number and
Aadhaar card of the applicant as well as sureties should be verified by the court
concerned.
11. 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.
12. 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.
October 1, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…