Allahabad High Court
KHADAK SINGH @ KHADAG SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits
Holding
The applicant, Khadak Singh, 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 Khadak Singh, who is charged with assault offences including sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 117(2) and 103(1) BNS, resulting in the death of Chandrika Singh. The applicant argued that a similarly situated co‑accused, Gulab Singh, had already been granted bail and that the investigation had not assigned any specific role to him, with only general omnibus allegations against all accused. The prosecution contended that the applicant and other co‑accused had directly assaulted the victims, and that the deceased had identified them before the investigating officer. The court noted the lack of distinct evidence against the applicant, the pending trial with only one prosecution witness examined, the applicant’s prior bail case, and the policy concerns of overcrowded jails, relying on recent Supreme Court and High Court precedents. 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
- What is the appropriate exercise of discretion under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in granting bail to an accused involved in an assault leading to death?
- Does the existence of a prior bail order for a similarly placed co‑accused affect the bail eligibility of the applicant?
- Whether the lack of specific incriminating statements against the applicant and the pendency of the trial justify the grant of bail?
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- Section 483
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- assault
- homicide
- overcrowded jails
- pre‑trial detention
- judicial discretion
- precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43866 of 2025
Khadak Singh @ Khadag 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 Dhananjay 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 two 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
BAIL No. 43866 of 2025
2
applicant and 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
lines.
6. As per the FIR, applicant and co-accused Gulab Singh and Dhananjay 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 Court 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 Khadak Singh @ Khadag 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.
BAIL No. 43866 of 2025
3
(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. 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…