Allahabad High Court
RAJESHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The court refused to enlarge bail for the applicant, holding that the seriousness of the injuries and the nature of the offences outweigh the parity argument.
Summary
Rajesh, who is in jail since 9‑Dec‑2024 for offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 109, 127(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., applied for enlargement of bail during trial. This is his second bail application; the first was rejected by Justice Gautam Chowdhary on 21‑Apr‑2025. Rajesh contended that co‑accused Ajay Sahani, Sanjay Bharti and Ramsurat, who faced identical charges, were granted bail by coordinate benches, and therefore he should be released on the ground of parity. The State, represented by the learned A.G.A., opposed the prayer, highlighting the severe injuries inflicted on the victim Anil, supported by a detailed medical report recommending spinal surgery and indicating permanent disability. After hearing both sides, the bench of Justice Harvir Singh held that the seriousness of the injuries and the nature of the offences outweighed the parity argument and refused to enlarge bail. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the principle of parity with co‑accused who have been granted bail warrants enlargement of bail for the applicant.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged offences and the severity of the victim's injuries justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 127(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 3(5), 351(2), 351(3), 352
Subjects
- bail
- parity
- serious injury
- criminal trial
- section 191
- section 352
- court discretion
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44429 of 2025
Rajesh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sugendra Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for
the State and perused the material on record.
2. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved
in Case Crime No. 1041 of 2024, under Sections 191(2),
191(3), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 109, 127(2) and 3(5)
of B.N.S., P.S. Jhangaha, District-Gorakhpur and is in jail since
9.12.2024, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
3. This is the second bail application of the applicant. The first
bail application of the applicant was rejected by Hon'ble
Gautam Chowdhary, J, vide order dated 21.4.2025 passed in
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4206 of 2025. The new
ground on which the the applicant is seeking enlargement on
bail during the trial, through this application is that after the
rejection of the first bail application of the applicant similarly
placed co-accused Ajay Sahani, Sanjay Bharti and Ramsurat
were enlarged on bail by this Court by coordinate Benches of
this Court vide orders dated 24.7.2025, 16.9.2025 and
15.9.2025 respectively passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application Nos. 15302 of 2025, 5399 of 2025 and 4907 of
2025. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant
BAIL No. 44429 of 2025
2
is identical to that of co-accused, Ajay Sahani, Sanjay Bharti
and Ramsurat who have already been enlarged on bail, he is
also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail and submitted that the injured Anil was
badly beaten by all the accused persons, causing serious
injuries to him. He further submitted that, according to
medical report of he injured "अनेक चोंटे उपस्थित हैं और कई चोटें गम्भीर
प्रकृति की है एवं डॉक्टर द्वारा आपरेशन तक की सलाह दी गई। उन्होंने न्यायालय का ध्यान
बयान डाक्टर अमिन्द गुप्ता एम.सी.एच. की ओर आकृष्ट किया कि "मजरूब अनिल पुत्र
चन्द्रिका की शरीर में सर में तथा रीड़ की हड़ी में कमर के पास गंभीर प्रकृति का चोट है
इस्पाइनल का आपरेशन करने के उपरान्त रिजल्ट देखा जायेगा। फिलहाल मजख्ब पूर्णतयः
विकलाग है जो न बैठ सकता है न चल सकता है यदि खड़ा हो गया तो स्थायी रूप से एक पैर
से विकलांग हो जायेगा।" and in view of the above, the accused-
applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
5. After having heard the learned counsel for the applicant,
learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record, this Court
is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail during the trial,
hence this bail application is rejected.
April 28, 2026
Faridul
(Harvir Singh,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
FAREEDUL HASAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…